Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
European Union Finances 2017: statement on the 2017 EU Budget
and measures to counter fraud and
financial mismanagement
Cm 9576 March 2018
European Union Finances 2017:
statement on the 2017 EU Budget and
measures to counter fraud and financial
mismanagement
Cm 9576
Presented to Parliament by
the Chief Secretary to the Treasury
by Command of Her Majesty
March 2018
© Crown copyright 2018
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except
where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-
government-licence/version/3
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain
permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications
Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at
ISBN 978-1-5286-0227-3
CCS0218042664 02/18
Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum
Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery
Office
1
Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction 2
Chapter 2 Expenditure 3
Chapter 3 Contributions to the EU Budget 9
Chapter 4 Financial Management and anti-fraud issues 16
Chapter 5 Government strategy on using EU funds in the UK: an update 28
Annex A Glossary 41
Annex B Technical annex 46
Annex C Tables 49
Annex D Report on the use of EU funds in the UK 53
2
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 In 1980, following a recommendation by the Public Accounts Committee
(PAC), the government agreed to present an annual statement (statement)
to Parliament giving details of the Budget of the European Union (EU
Budget).
1.2 This statement is the 37th in the series. First, it describes the EU Budget for
2017. It then sets out details, including some forecasts, of the United
Kingdom’s gross and net contributions to the EU Budget over the calendar
years 2011 to 2017 and over the financial years 2011-12 to 2022-23. Details
of recent developments in EU financial management and the fight against
fraud affecting EU funds are also provided, as is an update on the UK’s
strategy for using EU funds and minimising disallowance.
1.3 In December 2017, the UK agreed on a financial settlement relating to its
withdrawal from the EU, enabling Article 50 negotiations to move forward.
The UK will honour its share of commitments made during its membership,
while retaining access to EU funded programmes for the current EU Budget
period. The scope of the financial settlement is detailed in the joint report on
the progress of negotiations published by UK and EU negotiators, which can
be found on gov.uk1.
1.4 This statement has been prepared on the basis of the UK’s current
membership of the EU. In this statement, the government makes no further
assumptions about the contributions arising from the financial settlement
once it becomes legally binding through a Withdrawal Agreement, nor
about the UK’s future relationship with the EU. This is subject to negotiation.
1https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665869/Joint_report_on_progress_during_phase_1_
of_negotiations_under_Article_50_TEU_on_the_United_Kingdom_s_orderly_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union.pdf
3
Chapter 2
Expenditure
2.1 The Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) sets ceilings for each EU Annual
Budget. The current MFF covers the period 2014 to 2020. It was agreed in
2013 and achieved a real terms cut in the payment ceilings for the first time,
as well as confirming that the UK’s rebate would remain. The 2017
commitment appropriations ceiling was €155.6 billion (£133.2 billion1) and
the payment appropriations ceiling was €142.9 billion (£122.3 billion) 2.
Flexibilities available within the budgetary system enable proposals for the
overall level of commitments to be higher than the relevant ceiling. Further
information explaining the difference between payment and commitment
appropriations can be found in the glossary.
The 2017 EU Budget 2.2 The EU financial year runs from 1 January to 31 December. The 2017 EU
Budget for commitment and payment appropriations was agreed under the
Slovakian Presidency of the EU3 in the second half of 20164. Negotiations
began in June 2016, when the Commission proposed a draft EU Budget for
20175. This proposed total commitment appropriations of €157.7 billion
(£135.0 billion) and payment appropriations of €134.9 billion (£115.5
billion) in EU spending (nominal figures). The Commission amended its
proposal in October 2016, on the basis of new information that was not
available at the time that the draft Budget was drawn up. This resulted in an
updated draft EU Budget of €158.9 billion (£136.1 billion) in commitment
appropriations and €135.4 billion (£115.9 billion) in payments
appropriations6.
2.3 The Council adopted its position in September 2016, proposing to reduce
the Commission’s original proposal to €156.4 billion (£133.9 billion) in
commitment appropriations and €133.8 billion (£114.5 billion) in payment
1 2017: £1 = €1.16798. This is the 30 December 2016 exchange rate, which is the rate at which all UK VAT-based and GNI-based
contributions, and the UK rebate, were converted to sterling throughout 2017.
2 Draft General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/budget/data/DB/2017/en/SEC00.pdf
3 Council decision determining the order in which the office of President of the Council shall be held: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32007D0005
4 Deal reached on 2017 EU budget: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/11/17/budget-2017/
5 Commission proposes draft EU budget 2017: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2347_en.htm
6 Amending Letter No.1 to the Draft General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017:
http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/biblio/documents/2017/amending_letter_1_com679_en.pdf
4
appropriations7. In October 2016, the European Parliament provided its
position, which would have set the level of EU spending in 2017 to €162.4
billion (£139.1 billion) in commitment appropriations and €138.0 billion
(£118.2 billion) in payment appropriations8.
2.4 Following a process of conciliation between the Council and European
Parliament, the 2017 EU Budget was formally agreed. The adopted 2017 EU
Budget provided for commitment appropriations of €157.9 billion (£135.2
billion). The adopted 2017 EU Budget provided for payment appropriations
of €134.5 billion (£115.1 billion)9. The payment appropriations for each of
the main EU Budget headings are shown in Table 2.A: 2017 EU Budget.
2.5 Throughout the negotiations, the UK worked constructively with other
member states to ensure budgetary restraint. The UK believed the EU could
still go further to cut lower priority spending from the adopted Budget.
However, as progress was made, the UK recognised this by abstaining in the
vote for the adopted 2017 EU Budget.
2.6 Table 2.A also shows various stages of the negotiations during 2016. Figures
for previous years’ EU Budgets are provided for comparison in Annex C
(Tables C.1 and C.2).
2.7 Following a series of budget amendments – in-year expenditure and revenue
changes to the adopted EU Budget during the year of implementation – a
total of €7.7 billion of payment appropriations were deducted from the
adopted 2017 EU Budget, mainly due to the slower than expected
implementation of some EU programmes: primarily under Heading 1b
(European Structural and Investment Funds).
2.8 This left a final agreed 2017 EU Budget of €159.8 billion (£136.8 billion) in
commitment appropriations and €126.8 billion (£108.5 billion) in payment
appropriations10. Further details on budget amendments and the final
agreed 2017 EU Budget can be found in Box 2.A.
7 EU Budget 2017: Council sets out its position: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/09/12/eu-budget-
2017-council-sets-out-its-position/; Draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017: Council position of 19
July 2016: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11166-2016-INIT/en/pdf
8 Press release: Council cannot accept EP amendments: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/10/26/eu-
2017-budget-council-cannot-accept-ep-amendments/; European Parliament resolution of 26 October 2016 on the Council position
on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bTA%2bP8-TA-2016-
0411%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN
9 Deal reached on 2017 EU budget: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/11/17/budget-2017/; Definitive
adoption of the European Union’s general budget for the financial year 2017: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2017:051:FULL&from=EN
10 Draft amending budget No. 6/2017: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0597&from=EN
5
Box 2.A: Budget Amendments and the Final Agreed 2017 EU Budget
The final agreed 2017 EU Budget of €126.8 billion in payments is well within
the 2017 payments ceiling agreed in the 2013 MFF deal of €142.9 billion.
Table 2.A shows payment appropriations for the adopted 2017 EU Budget.
This is the original 2017 EU Budget which was formally agreed by the Council
and European Parliament in November 2016. This is prior to any in-year
budget amendments.
Table 2.A also shows the final agreed 2017 EU Budget. This includes the
effects of draft amending budgets 1-6 approved by the Council and European
Parliament. Draft amending budgets are proposals made by the Commission
to amend certain aspects of the adopted Budget of a year. These can increase
or decrease expenditure in line with updated forecasts of expenditure and
revenue. They can also adjust member state contributions. In total, the final
agreed 2017 Budget was €7.7 billion lower in payment appropriations than
when adopted, primarily due to the slower than expected implementation of
EU programmes, and mostly under Heading 1b (European Structural and
Investment Funds). Chart 2.A shows the payment appropriations by heading
for the final agreed 2017 EU Budget.
The final agreed 2017 EU Budget will be referred to in the text, used in tables
and displayed in charts throughout this document, unless stated otherwise.
6
Table 2.A: 2017 EU Budget
1 Draft General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/budget/data/DB/2017/en/SEC00.pdf
2 EU annual budget life-cycle: figure: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/annual/index_en.cfm?year=2017
3 Draft Amending Budget No. 6/2017: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0597&from=EN
4 Draft Amending Budget No. 6/2016: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/budget/data/BR/2016/en/BR06.pdf
€ million nominal
Payment Appropriations Financial Perspective
Ceiling1
Commission draft
2017 EU Budget2
Council position2 European
Parliament position2
Adopted 2017 EU
Budget2
Final Agreed 2017
EU Budget3
Final Agreed 2016
EU Budget4
1. Smart and Inclusive Growth 56,647 56,116 57,855 56,522 49,394 59,291
1a. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs 19,298 18,966 19,993 19,321 19,321 17,402
1b. Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion 37,349 37,150 37,862 37,201 30,073 41,888
2. Sustainable Growth: Natural Resources 55,236 55,038 55,862 54,914 54,121 54,972
3. Security and Citizenship 3,782 3,760 3,862 3,787 3,224 3,022
4. Global Europe 9,290 9,220 9,790 9,483 9,056 10,156
5. Administration 9,324 9,266 9,355 9,395 9,395 8,951
Total Payment Appropriations* 142,906 134,899 133,790 138,029 134,490 126,771 136,642
Note:
*Column totals do not equal the sum of individual items due to rounding and spending not attributable to any heading.
7
2.9 Details of the levels of payments in the final agreed 2017 EU Budget are as
follows (all figures are nominal)1:
• Heading 1: Smart and Inclusive Growth. Expenditure in this area includes
research and development, education and training, employment and
social policy. Payments for Heading 1 overall were set at €49.4 billion
(£42.3 billion).
• Payments towards research, learning, and innovation (Heading 1a) were
set at €19.3 billion (£16.5 billion). Payments toward fostering regional
growth and employment (Heading 1b) were set at €30.1 billion (£25.7
billion).
• Heading 2: Sustainable Growth: Natural Resources. Expenditure in this
area includes spending on the Common Agricultural Policy, fisheries, rural
development, and measures aiming to contribute to food quality and a
cleaner environment. Payments in this area were set at €54.1 billion
(£46.3 billion).
• Heading 3: Security and Citizenship. Expenditure in this area includes
immigration, migration, security, and fundamental rights and justice.
Payments for Heading 3 overall in 2017, excluding those associated with
the European Union Solidarity Fund, were set at €3.2 billion (£2.8 billion).
• Heading 4: Global Europe. Expenditure in this area is focused on EU
foreign policy and international development. Payments for Heading 4
were set at €9.1 billion (£7.8 billion).
• Heading 5: Administration. Expenditure for Heading 5 is on the
functioning of the EU institutions and includes remuneration and
allowances for staff and members, pension costs, and rent and other
building costs. Payments for 2017 under Heading 5 were set at €9.4
billion (£8.0 billion).
2.10 For 2018, the adopted EU Budget was agreed in November 2017 with
commitment appropriations of €160.1 billion (£142.1 billion2) and payment
appropriations of €144.7 billion (£128.4 billion) 3. The 2018 EU Budget will
be covered in detail in the next EU Finances statement.
1 Draft Amending Budget No. 6/2017: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0597&from=EN
2 2018: £1 = €1.11271. This is the 29 December 2017 exchange rate, which is the rate at which all UK VAT-based and GNI-based
contributions, and the UK rebate, are being converted to sterling throughout 2018.
3 EU budget for 2018: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-annual-budget/2018/
8
Chart 2.A: Final Agreed 2017 EU Budget – payment appropriations by budget heading
Source: Draft Amending Budget No. 6/2017:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0597&from=EN
Competiveness for growth and jobs
15%
Economic, social and territorial
cohesion24%
Sustainable growth: natural resources43%
Security and citizenship3%
Global Europe7%
Administration8%
9
Chapter 3
Contributions to the EU Budget
EU revenue 3.1 The Own Resources Decision provides for three sources of EU revenue:
customs duties and sugar levies known as Traditional Own Resources (TOR);
contributions based on VAT; and GNI-based contributions. A more detailed
explanation can be found in the glossary.
3.2 Chart 3.A shows a breakdown of how the 2017 EU Budget was financed by
EU member states1. The key points to note for the 2017 EU Budget are:
• TOR is €20.5 billion (£17.6 billion) and the UK’s share is 15.3%. In 2016,
outturn revenue from this source was €20.1 billion (£16.5 billion), of
which the UK’s share was 15.7%.
• VAT-based contributions are €16.6 billion (£14.2 billion) and the UK’s
share is 20.0%. In 2016, total VAT-based contributions were €15.9 billion
(£13.0 billion), of which the UK’s share was 20.9%.
• GNI-based contributions are €78.4 billion (£67.1 billion) and the UK’s
share is 15.4%. In 2016, GNI-based contributions were €95.6 billion
(£78.3 billion) with a UK share of 16.0%.
• The estimated value of the UK’s rebate in 2017 is €5.0 billion (£4.3
billion) compared with €5.9 billion (£4.8 billion) in 2016. A detailed
explanation of how the UK rebate is calculated, and how it operates, can
be found in Annex 1: the glossary.
1 Estimates are sourced from the Amending Budget No. 6/2017: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018B0091&from=EN; Outturns are sourced from the European Commission’s 2016 EU Budget
Financial Report: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/figures/internet-tables-all.xls
10
Chart 3.A: 2017 EU Budget Revenue
Source: Amending Budget No. 6/2017:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018B0091&from=EN
3.3 Chart 3.B shows each member state’s share of financing the 2017 EU
Budget after taking account of the UK rebate.
Chart 3.B: EU Budget revenue 2017 – percentage share after rebates by member state
Source: Amending Budget No. 6/2017:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018B0091&from=EN
TOR, 18%
VAT, 14%
GNI, 68%
Belgium, 4.53%Bulgaria, 0.37%
Czech Republic, 1.26%
Denmark, 1.93%
Germany, 20.63%
Estonia, 0.16%
Ireland, 1.62%
Greece, 1.24%Spain, 8.46%
France, 15.73%
Croatia, 0.33%
Italy, 11.92%
Cyprus, 0.13%
Latvia, 0.20%
Lithuania, 0.31%
Luxembourg, 0.25%
Hungary, 0.84%
Malta, 0.07%
Netherlands, 5.14%
Austria, 2.28%
Poland, 3.13%
Portugal, 1.30%
Romania, 1.18%
Slovenia, 0.31%
Slovakia, 0.57%
Finland, 1.48%
Sweden, 2.79%
UK, 11.82%
11
The UK’s net contribution 3.4 Table 3.A shows the UK’s gross payments, rebate, public sector receipts and
net public sector contributions to the EU Budget for calendar years 2011 to
2017. The figures for 2017 include estimates; those for earlier years are
outturns.
Table 3.A: Gross payments, rebate and receipts (calendar years)
£ million
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Gross contribution1 15,357 15,746 18,135 18,778 19,560 16,996 18,625
Less: UK rebate -3,143 -3,110 -3,674 -4,416 -4,914 -3,878 -5,633
Less: Public sector receipts -4,132 -4,169 -3,996 -4,583 -3,883 -3,492 -4,084
Net public sector contribution2
8,082 8,467 10,465 9,779 10,763 9,626 8,909
Notes:
1 Gross payment figures include Traditional Own Resources payments at 75% up to September 2016 and 80% thereafter. The
remainder is retained by the UK. The UK’s gross payments are automatically corrected to account for the rebate, meaning the UK only pays the post-rebate amount. 2 Due to rounding, totals may not exactly correspond to the sum of individual items.
Source: HM Treasury calculations.
3.5 The fluctuation in the UK’s net public sector contribution to the EU Budget is
due to the nature of the Own Resources system, and consequential
fluctuations in the UK rebate, as well as variations in public sector receipts
and the exchange rate. For further details, refer to the Annex A, the glossary,
and Annex B, the Technical Annex.
3.6 UK public sector receipts in 2017, mainly from the European Agricultural
Guarantee Fund (EAGF), European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development
(EAFRD) and the Social and Regional Development Funds, are worth around
£4.1 billion. The majority of these receipts will either be paid to, or used in
support of, the private sector but are channelled through government
departments or agencies.
The EU makes some payments directly to the private sector, for example to
carry out research activities. These payments do not appear in public sector
accounts. It is estimated that in 2015, these receipts were worth £1.5 billion
(see Annex B). These payments are not included in Table 3.A or Tables 3.C to
3.F, which provide data only on receipts channelled through the public
sector.
3.7 The Commission also publishes outturn data on all member states’
contributions to the EU Budget and their receipts in previous years. These
give a figure for UK’s net contribution that is different from the numbers
derived from the OBR’s forecasts and UK data. The main reason for this
12
difference is that the Commission’s numbers take into account all of the UK’s
receipts and include those that go directly to UK-based recipients, such as
funding for research paid directly to UK universities.
3.8 Table 3.B sets out the Commission figures for the UK’s gross contributions
and receipts and the implied net contribution. They are taken from the
Commission’s latest financial report.
Table 3.B: EU Commission Financial Report data (calendar years)
Gross contribution
post rebate (€ billion)
Total public and private
receipts (€ billion)
Net contribution
(€ billion)
Net contribution
(£ billion)
2012 16.18 6.93 9.24 7.50
2013 17.07 6.31 10.76 9.13
2014 14.07 6.98 7.09 5.71
2015 21.41 7.46 13.95 10.13
2016 16.62 7.05 9.57 7.84
Average 17.07 6.95 10.12 8.06
Source: 2016 EU Budget Financial Report, European Commission.
3.9 Figures for 2016 include a redistribution of total contributions across the
member states following the implementation of the 2014 Own Resources
Decision agreed in 2013 as part of the 2014 to 2020 MFF agreement. The
new Decision required ratification by all member states in accordance with
their own constitutional requirements before it could enter into force. The
Decision was ratified by the UK Parliament through the EU (Finances) Act
2015. The redistribution has been fully anticipated in OBR forecasts since
December 2013.
3.10 In accordance with a commitment to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC),
the Technical Annex of this document explains the main differences in
respect of calendar year 2015 between the government’s figures and those
which can be derived from the European Commission’s EU Budget Financial
Report.
3.11 Chart 3.C shows how the UK’s net position compares with those of other
member states.
13
Chart 3.C: Average net contribution as % of GNI by for the years 2012-2016
Source: 2016 EU Budget Financial Report, European Commission.
Financial year transactions 3.12 The EU financial year runs from 1 January to 31 December, whereas the UK’s
runs from 1 April to 31 March. Table 3.C gives a breakdown of the UK’s
transactions with the EU on a financial year basis between 2011-12 and
2016-17.
3.13 Payments to the EU Budget are scheduled on a monthly basis, though the
Commission can request earlier contributions from member states of VAT-
based and GNI-based contributions and the UK rebate, to take account of
frontloaded CAP or European Structural and Investment Funds payments,
which take place in the first months of the calendar year.
Table 3.C: Gross contribution, rebate and public sector receipts (financial years – outturn)
£ million
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Gross contribution1 15,700 16,871 18,208 18,733 17,635 16,926
Less: UK rebate -3,516 -3,172 -4,130 -4,811 -4,068 -4,757
Less: Public sector receipts -4,771 -4,022 -3,856 -4,690 -2,811 -4,081
Net public sector contribution2 7,413 9,678 10,223 9,231 10,756 8,088
Notes: 1 Gross payment figures include Traditional Own Resources payments at 75% up to September 2016 and 80% thereafter. The
remainder is retained by the UK. The UK’s gross payments are automatically corrected to account for the rebate, meaning the UK only pays the post-rebate amount. 2 Due to rounding, totals may not exactly correspond to the sum of individual items.
Source: HM Treasury calculations.
-5%
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
1%
Luxe
mb
ourg
Hun
gar
y
Bulg
aria
Lith
uan
ia
Latv
ia
Est
onia
Rom
ania
Pola
nd
Gre
ece
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Slo
vaki
a
Port
ug
al
Slo
venia
Mal
ta
Cro
ati
a
Bel
giu
m
Spai
n
Cyp
rus
Irel
and
Ital
y
Finla
nd
Aust
ria
Fran
ce
Den
mar
k
UK
Swed
en
Ger
man
y
Net
her
land
s
14
3.14 The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasts the UK’s contributions to
the EU Annual Budget in future years. No assumptions have been made in
this statement about the UK’s exit from the EU, any future relationship the
UK might have with the EU nor any financial implications of the UK leaving
the EU. Instead, this statement reproduces the forecast adopted by the OBR
in their March 2018 Economic and Fiscal Outlook. The OBR forecasts a sum
equivalent to UK contributions past the point of the UK’s exit from the EU,
up to the end of the forecast period (i.e. 2022-23), under the fiscally neutral
assumption that any post-exit contributions will be used for spending
elsewhere. The OBR splits its estimate of post-exit contributions between
flows associated with a financial settlement and assumed spending in lieu of
EU transfers. The assumptions underlying its forecasts can be found in the
OBR’s March 2018 Economic and Fiscal Outlook.
3.15 Table 3.D provides a breakdown of the OBR’s latest forecast for UK
transactions with the EU over the period 2017-18 to 2022-23. Tables 3.E
(outturn figures) and 3.F (forecast) provide a more detailed breakdown of UK
receipts by major programmes from the EU Budget over the periods 2011-
12 to 2016-17 (outturn) and 2017-18 to 2022-23 (forecast).
Table 3.D: OBR forecast of gross contribution, rebate and receipts (financial years)
£ million
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23
Gross contribution1 17,438 20,323 22,458 21,732 21,626 21,516
Less: UK rebate -4,631 -4,411 -4,634 -4,763 -4,757 -4,764
Less: Public sector receipts -4,506 -5,107 -5,604 -6,125 -6,005 -6,053
Net public sector contribution2 8,301 10,805 12,221 10,845 10,864 10,698
Source: March 2018 Economic and Fiscal Outlook, Office for Budget Responsibility.
15
Table 3.E: Public sector receipts from the EU Budget (financial years – outturn)
£ million
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
European Agriculture Guarantee
Fund 2,973 2,956 2,602 2,513 1,318 3,057
European Agricultural Fund for
Rural Development 462 298 638 393 619 367
Social Fund 552 366 249 371 543 268
Regional Development Fund 709 327 275 1,308 297 237
Other Receipts 74 75 92 105 34 151
Total 4,771 4,022 3,856 4,690 2,811 4,081
Source: HM Treasury calculations.
Table 3.F: OBR forecast of public sector receipts from the EU Budget (financial years)
£ million
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23
European Agriculture Guarantee
Fund 2,839 2,738 2,612 2,851 2,934 2,965
European Agricultural Fund for
Rural Development 659 775 972 1,051 990 997
Social Fund 194 505 640 706 661 664
Regional Development Fund 482 857 1,082 1,184 1,111 1,117
Other Receipts 332 232 296 332 309 311
Total 4,506 5,107 5,604 6,125 6,005 6,053
Source: March 2018 Economic and Fiscal Outlook, Office for Budget Responsibility.
16
Chapter 4
Financial Management and anti-fraud issues
4.1 This chapter provides an overview of the annual reports – relating to
financial management and anti-fraud issues – published in 2016 and
concerning the 2015 EU budget. First, the European Court of Auditors (ECA)
annual report that holds the Commission and member states to account for
their management of the EU Budget. This report assesses the
implementation of the EU Budget and identifies examples of irregular
management or expenditure. Second, the Commission’s annual ‘Fight
Against Fraud’ report details the actions taken by the Commission and
member states to counter fraud affecting EU funds. The report also
highlights areas that are most at risk of fraud and in need of targeted action
at both EU and national level.
European Court of Auditors’ annual report on the 2015 EU Budget 4.2 The ECA is the EU’s independent auditor and is responsible for assessing the
accounts and payments of EU Institutions. The ECA is required to provide the
European Parliament and Council with an annual report on the
implementation of the EU Budget1. This report assesses the fairness and
accuracy of the EU budget accounts and the regularity of the underlying
transactions (the level of error). The report also contains targeted
recommendations to address identified errors and weaknesses. It includes a
Statement of Assurance (usually referred to as the ‘DAS’, from the French
‘Déclaration d'Assurance’) which confirms whether the EU accounts are
complete and accurate, and whether income and expenditure have been
managed in accordance with all contractual and legal obligations. The report
forms an essential element in the European Parliament’s oversight of the
Commission’s management of the EU Budget.
4.3 The ECA’s report also launches the annual ‘discharge’ process, the procedure
whereby the European Parliament, acting on a recommendation from the
Council, decides whether to release the Commission from its responsibility
for the management of the Budget for the year in question.
4.4 The ECA’s report on the 2015 EU budget was published on 13 October
2016. As in previous years, it provided an assessment of each EU Budget
1 The European Court of Auditors’ annual report on the 2015 EU Budget can be found at:
https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/annualreports-2015/annualreports-2015-EN.pdf
17
area and offered conclusions based mainly on: testing the regularity of
transactions; the effectiveness of the principal supervisory and control
systems governing the revenue or expenditure involved; and a review of the
performance of the EU Budget.
ECA’s Statement of Assurance 4.5 In the ECA’s opinion, the 2015 EU budget accounts were reliable and gave a
fair presentation of the financial position and the results of operations and
cash flows for the year.
4.6 The ECA found EU revenue underlying the 2015 accounts to be legal and
regular in all material aspects, as they have done in every year since 2007.
4.7 The ECA found that payments (EU spending) continued to be affected by
material error with an estimated error rate of 3.8%2 for the 2015 EU Budget
as a whole, a small decrease from 4.4% for the 2014 budget.
4.8 The ECA considers an estimated error rate above 2% to be material. The
ECA’s estimate of the level of error is not a measure of fraud, inefficiency or
waste. It is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out
because it was not used in accordance with the relevant rules and
regulations. This can include payments for expenditure which was ineligible
or for purchases without proper application of public purchasing rules.
Supervisory and control systems were found to be partially effective in most
cases, highlighting the need for further improvements.
4.9 All individually assessed areas of EU spending were affected by material
error, with the exception of administrative expenditure. In light of these
findings, for the twenty-second consecutive year, the ECA granted a
qualified DAS with regards to the legality and regularity of the transactions
underlying the EU Budget accounts.
4.10 In their report, the ECA provide specific assessments for revenue and
expenditure policy groups as follows:
• Chapter 2 – Budgetary and Financial Management: This covers the key
budgetary and financial management issues which arose in 2015. These
include overall levels of spending, the relationship with budgetary and
Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) ceilings, levels of unpaid payment
claims, levels of outstanding commitments and levels of cash held in
financial instruments. The ECA recommended that the Commission:
• act to reduce the level of outstanding commitments by closing 2007 to
2013 programme faster (where appropriate), reducing cash held by
fiduciaries and compiling payment plans and forecasts for areas where
outstanding commitments are significant;
2 The European Court of Auditors’ annual report on the 2015 EU Budget can be found at:
https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/annualreports-2015/annualreports-2015-EN.pdf (paragraph 1.19(b))
18
• prepare and publish an annually updated cash flow forecast, spanning
a seven to ten-year period, covering budgetary ceilings, payment
needs, capacity constraints and potential decommitments;
• consider the capacity constraints in member states to ensure that funds
are used efficiently;
• recover unused cash balances in financial instruments under shared
management and remaining unused funds in indirect management
financial instruments from the previous MFF from which the eligibility
period has expired; and
• re-evaluate the ex-ante assessment for the Connecting Europe Facility
(CEF) debt instrument in light of the creation of the European Fund for
Strategic Investment (EFSI) and consider the impact of EFSI on other EU
programmes and financial instruments.
• Chapter 3 – Getting Results from the EU Budget: The theme of this
chapter is performance. It covers the Commission’s reporting on
performance, the management plans of selected directorate-generals
(DGs) and the reporting by the Commission to the European Parliament
and Council. This chapter has three parts: the first on Horizon 2020
performance; the second on Performance and Reporting by Directorates
General implementing the ‘Natural Resources’ section of the budget; and
the third on the Results of the Court’s Audit on Performance. The ECA
concluded that:
• while there are high level links between Horizon 2020 and the EU’s
main strategy, Europe 2020, the indicators shared by Horizon 2020
and Europe 2020 are of limited use in tracking how well Horizon 2020
contributes to the Europe 2020 strategy;
• the links between the Commission’s ten political priorities and Europe
2020/Horizon 2020 need clarification as they overlap but are not
identical and it is not clear which set of priorities Horizon 2020 should
be aligned with;
• further developments to the legal framework of Horizon 2020 are
needed to improve performance management such as baselines,
milestones and targets;
• proposals and grant agreement objectives were generally SMART3
when required by the Commission and grant agreements require
beneficiaries to report information on key performance indicators to
the Commission, but use of the concept of ‘expected impact’ rather
than the narrower concept of ‘expected result’ means there is a risk
that the information provided is too broad;
• the Commission is limited in its ability to monitor and report on
Horizon 2020’s performance as there are weaknesses in the
monitoring and reporting system; and
3 Specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound.
19
• the Commission does not always abide by its definitions of terms such
as ‘inputs’, ‘outputs’, ‘results’ and ‘impacts’ and this creates problems
in translating legislation into individual work programmes.
The ECA recommended that the Commission should:
• translate the high-level Horizon 2020 legislation objectives into
operational objectives at work programme levels so that they can be
used effectively to drive performance;
• clarify the links between the Europe 2020 strategy (2010 to 2020), the
MFF (2014 to 2020), and the Commission priorities (2015 to 2019) to
enable it to report effectively on how the budget contributes towards
the Europe 2020 objectives; this could be done through the strategic
planning and reporting process (2016 to 2020); and
• use the terms ‘input’, ‘output’, ‘result’ and ‘impact’ consistently and in
line with its better regulation guidelines.
• Chapter 4 – Revenue: This covers the revenue through which the EU
finances its budget. For 2015 the ECA concluded that member states’
payments of TOR, VAT and GNI based resources and other revenue were
all free from material error. The error rate for transactions tested was
found to be nil. The examined supervisory and control systems for GNI
and VAT-based own resources and other revenue were assessed as
effective. The examined systems for TOR were also assessed as effective
overall. However, key internal controls in member states visited were
assessed as only partially effective.
The ECA recommended that the Commission should:
• take steps to ensure that economic operators receive the same
treatment regarding the time limits of debt notifications in all member
states;
• provide member states with guidance to improve their management of
items recorded in the B accounts;
• ensure that member states correctly declare and make available the
amounts collected from customs duties in their quarterly statements;
• facilitate the recovery of customs debts by member states where the
debtors are not based in an EU member state; and
• improve checks on the calculations of the European Economic Area
(EEA) and the European Free Trade Area (EFTA) contributions and
correction mechanisms.
• Chapter 5 – ‘Competitiveness for growth and jobs’: This chapter covers
spending on research and innovation, enhancing education systems,
promoting employment, ensuring a digital single market, promoting
renewable and efficient energy, transport and improving the business
environment particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
The ECA found that the error rate in this area was 4.4% (down from 5.6%
20
in 2014). The main source of error was reimbursement of ineligible
personnel costs. The ECA recommended that the Commission:
• uses all information available to prevent, detect and correct errors
before reimbursement, while national authorities and independent
auditors should do the same;
• issues guidance to beneficiaries on the specific differences in Horizon
2020 compared to the Seventh Research Framework Programme and
similar programmes;
• issues common guidelines to implementing bodies to ensure consistent
treatment of beneficiaries when applying audit recommendations for
the recovery of ineligible costs; and
• monitors the implementation of corrections which have been
extrapolated based on ex-post audits of reimbursed costs under the
Seventh Research Framework Programme.
• Chapter 6 – ‘Economic, social and territorial cohesion’: This covers the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the Cohesion Fund (CF),
the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fund for European Aid to the
Most Deprived (FEAD). Funding in this area aims to reduce development
disparities between different regions, restructure declining industrial
areas, diversify rural areas and encourage cross-border, transnational and
inter-regional cooperation. The ECA identified the most prevalent cause of
error as including ineligible costs in expenditure declarations. The overall
error rate across this MFF heading area was 5.2% (down from 5.7% in
2014). The ECA recommended that the Commission should:
• reconsider the design and delivery mechanism for European Structural
and Investment (ESI) funds when making its legislative proposal for the
next programming period, taking account of the suggestions of the
high-level simplification group;
• use the experience gained in the 2007 to 2013 programming period
and should report on an analysis of national eligibility rules for the
2014 to 2020 period in order to provide guidance to member states
on how to simplify and avoid unnecessarily complex and/or
burdensome rules;
• submit a legislative proposal to amend Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006
regarding the extension of the eligibility period for financial
instruments under shared management in order to provide legal
certainty to member states;
• clarify to member states the notion of recoverable VAT for the 2014 to
2020 programming period in order to avoid different interpretations;
and
• ensure that all expenditure related to ERDF and ESF financial
instruments for the 2017 to 2013 programming period are included
early enough in the closure declarations for the audit authorities to
carry out their checks.
21
• Chapter 7 – ‘Natural resources’: This covers assessments of the European
Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) (one of the two main instruments of
the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the EU) and for other spending
including rural development, environment, climate action and fisheries.
The ECA estimated the error rate as 2.9% (down from 3.6% in 2014). The
most significant cause error was overstatement of the area of land eligible
for support. The ECA recommended that the Commission:
• continues to follow up on cases where national legislation is not
compliant with EU legislation using all legal means at its disposal;
• monitors annually the results of the Land Parcel Identification System
(LPIS) quality assessments performed by member states and check that
all member states with negative assessments take remedial action;
• ensures that all member states’ action plans addressing errors in rural
development include effective actions on public procurement;
• monitors and supports certification bodies in improving their work and
methodology on the legality and regularity of expenditure;
• updates DG Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) audit
manual to include detailed audit procedures and documentation
requirements for checking data supplied by member states; and
• improves the compliance of DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DG
MARE) conformity audits with international auditing standards.
• Chapter 8 – ‘Global Europe’ and ‘Security and Citizenship’ This covers
payments in the fields of: external relations; development and
humanitarian aid; measures for EU candidate and accession countries and
expenditure related to regional policy; rural development; research; other
internal policies as well as on migration; security; the food and feed
programme; and the Creative Europe programme. The ECA found that
the estimated error rate for Global Europe is 2.8% (up from 2.7% in
2014). Claims for expenditure not incurred and ineligible expenditure
were the most significant types of error. The ECA does not calculate an
error rate for ‘Security and Citizenship’ as there are too few transactions
for it to take a representative sample. The ECA recommends that:
• DG International Cooperation and Development (DG DEVCO) and DG
Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) enhance
the expenditure verifications contracted by beneficiaries by introducing
new measures such as use of a quality grid to check the work
performed by beneficiary contracted auditors;
• DG NEAR ensures that funding channelled through a twinning
instrument accords with the non-profit rule and adheres to the
principle of sound financial management; and
• DG NEAR revises the residual error rate (RER) methodology to provide
statistically accurate information on the amount at risk for payments
made under IPA indirect management.
22
• Chapter 9 – ‘Administration’: This covers the administrative and other
expenditure of EU institutions and bodies. Expenditure in this area
includes human resources (salaries, allowances and pensions), which
account for 60% of the spending in this policy group, in addition to
expenditure on buildings, equipment, energy, communications and
information technology, which accounts for the remainder. The results of
the ECA audits of the EU agencies and other decentralised bodies are
reported in specific annual reports, which are published separately. The
ECA concluded that payments were not affected by material error
(estimated error rate of 0.6%) but noted weaknesses in checks carried out
by the European Parliament on political parties’ expenditure and a small
number of errors relating to calculating staff costs and managing family
allowances. The ECA recommended that:
• the European Parliament reviews its framework for implementing
budget appropriations allocated to political groups and provides better
guidance on the rules for authorisation and settlement of expenditure
and for procurement procedures;
• the Commission improves its monitoring systems for updating the
personal situation of staff which can have an impact on the calculation
of family allowances;
• the European External Action Service (EEAS) ensures that all steps in
the procedures for selecting local agents to delegations are properly
documented; and
• the EEAS improves its guidance on design, co-ordination and execution
of procurement procedures for contracts worth less than €60,000.
Council recommendation to the European Parliament on Discharge 4.11 On 21 February 2017, the Council noted both the ECA’s Statement of
Assurance on the implementation of the EU Budget for the financial year
2015 and the ECA’s analysis of the audit findings and conclusions4. The
Council stressed the importance of independent audits carried out at EU
level and strongly supported the ECA’s work and audit findings.
4.12 However, the Council remained concerned that payments from the EU
budget continued to be materially affected by error, and reiterated its desire
to see year-on-year improvements in financial management systems and the
estimated level of error across all policy areas. The Council also stated that
simplification of rules is key to achieving a lower error rate and invited the
Commission and member states to use the simplification options available.
4.13 In its conclusions responding to the ECA’s Statement of Assurance, the
Council made a number of recommendations5. The Council:
4 http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6475-2017-INIT/en/pdf
5The Draft Council recommendation can be found at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/114560/st05876-ad01.en17.pdf
23
• regretted that the Commission and national authorities did not make full
use of the available information to prevent, detect and correct a
significant proportion of errors, which would have substantially reduced
the estimated level of error across all chapters of expenditure;
• called on the Commission to continue to implement all available corrective
measures and encouraged the ECA and the Commission to work together
to ensure that they have consistent approaches on the evaluation of how
financial corrections affect the estimated amount at closure and that they
provide comparable data;
• invited the Commission and member states to take full advantage of
simplification options when implementing programmes under the current
legal framework;
• called on member states to continue to co-operate with the Commission
and to prioritise improving the quality of first level checks to detect,
prevent and correct errors;
• called on the Commission to ensure that all available information on
financial instruments under shared management is shared transparently;
• encouraged the ECA, the Commission and member states to improve the
exchange of information on audit results to ensure efficient application of
the ‘Single Audit’ principle;
• called on the Commission to consider capacity constraints in member
states in its budgetary and financial management in order to avoid the
underutilisation of funds;
• called on the Commission to prepare and publish a long-term, transparent
cash flow forecast;
• invited the ECA to extend its review of the performance of programmes
and projects in the ‘Economic, Social and Territorial cooperation’ and
‘Natural Resources’ policy areas across all policy areas; and
• invited the Commission to continue to promote the use of simplified cost
options, particularly in areas where the ECA found the most instances of
error.
4.14 On 21 February 2017, Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK voted against
the Council’s recommendation on discharge in order to highlight the need
for further improvements in budgetary management. Sweden and the
Netherlands also submitted a joint counter-statement calling for progress in
key areas, including systematically evaluating the efficiency, EU added value
and contribution to EU-priorities of each area of the EU Budget6.
6 http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6554-2017-INIT/en/pdf
24
The European Parliament takes a final decision on whether to discharge the EU Budget. 4.15 On 27 April 2017, the European Parliament formally approved the discharge
of the EU budget accounts for 2015 and issued their Resolution7. It did so
having considered the ECA’s report, the Commission’s response, and the
recommendation of the Council.
UK government’s response to the European Commission’s questionnaire on ECA findings 4.16 The ECA report included examples of specific issues identified in individual
member states, including the UK. These examples are used to illustrate the
issues raised in the report. The Commission sends a questionnaire to
member states so that they can respond to all ECA findings. The Treasury co-
ordinates a cross-Whitehall response with individual departments, providing
detail on areas where they are mentioned or that are relevant to them. This
could involve giving detail of how the UK addresses such problems, noting
that sanctions were applied or highlighting ongoing work. The Treasury also
ensures that relevant views from departments are fed into working group
discussions with other member states and the Commission on the substance
of the report.
4.17 In all cases where weaknesses were identified, the relevant UK authorities
engaged with the Commission and the ECA and, where appropriate, took
steps to strengthen national systems and processes. Below is an example of
two such cases.
Audit Finding: irregular payments due to incorrect eligibility data in the LPIS.
UK response: These issues are addressed by the English Authorities’ Land
Parcel Identification System (LPIS) action plan, which is on-going and
monitored by the Commission.
Audit Finding: Deficiencies in administrative cross-checks.
UK response: Northern Ireland Authorities accept the Court’s finding, but
believe that there was no risk to the fund. Validation software has now been
updated to avoid future issues.
Fight against Fraud Report 2015 4.18 The protection of the EU’s financial interests and the fight against fraud are
areas of shared responsibility between the Commission and member states.
Each year, the Commission, in cooperation with member states, issues a
report on details of irregularities, the latest statistics on fraud and recent
measures taken to reduce irregularities and fraud. This report is required
7 Discharge 2015: EU general budget 2015 – European Parliament can be found at:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA-2017-0146+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
25
under Article 325 (5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union (TFEU), and is sent to the Parliament and Council.
4.19 As in previous years, the report summarises and evaluates measures taken by
the Commission and member states to counter fraud and irregularities in
relation to EU Budget funds. The report also includes both the latest
information on irregularities detected by control systems and suspected
fraud (with a distinction made between fraud and other irregularities), and
on measures taken to deal with them. The 2015 report8, published on 14
July 2016, covers:
• anti-fraud policies at the EU level;
• detection and reporting of fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities
that affect the EU budget; and
• measures taken by member states to counter fraud and other illegal
activities which affect the EU’s financial interests.
4.20 The report is accompanied by six Commission Staff Working Papers: (i)
Implementation of Article 325 TFEU by the member states in 2015; (ii)
Statistical Evaluation of Irregularities reported for 2015; (iii) Follow-up
recommendations to the Commission report on the protection of the EU’s
financial interests - Fight Against Fraud 2014; (iv) Methodology regarding
the statistical evaluation of reported irregularities for 2015; (v) Annual
overview with information on the results of the Hercule III programme in
2015; and (vi) Implementation of the Commission Anti-Fraud Strategy
(CAFS).
4.21 Member states are required to report irregularities and suspicions of fraud
affecting the EU’s financial interests in the areas where they implement the
Budget.
Irregularities reported as fraudulent
4.22 In 2015, a total of 1,461 irregularities were reported as fraudulent
(suspected and established fraud), of which 849 were related to expenditure
and 612 were related to revenue (for example, customs fraud). The
estimated financial impact of irregularities reported as fraudulent was
€637.2 million (£462.6 million)9. Revenue (e.g. customs) was the policy area
with the highest number of irregularities reported as fraudulent. However,
Cohesion policy accounted for the highest value of suspected fraudulent
transactions, at 0.96% of the total amounts involved.
Other irregularities (not reported as fraudulent)
4.23 In 2015, a total of 20,888 irregularities were reported as non-fraudulent.
The estimated financial impact of these irregularities was €2.6 billion (£1.9
billion).
8 The 2015 Fight Against Fraud Report can be found at: https://ec.europa.eu/anti-fraud/sites/antifraud/files/pifreport_2015_en.pdf
9 2015: £1 = €1.37741. This is the 2015 average exchange rate.
26
Recommendations
4.24 The report considers the actions taken by the Commission in 2015 to
counter fraud, including use of financial corrections and preventive measures
where fraud was suspected. OLAF made 98 recommendations to national
authorities, recommending that approximately €888 million (£645 million)
should be recovered.
4.25 The report’s recommendations called for all member states to:
• balance trade facilitation and the protection of the EU’s financial interests
by sharing best practice, incorporating information received through EU
information sharing and reporting systems into risk management and to
co-operate closely and exchange information over post-clearance controls
and audits across borders;
• adapt customs control strategies by: amending their yearly planning of
staff and resources needed for verification of information received by
voluntary admission, taking account of the types of irregularities revealed
by voluntary admissions and extending customs controls to other
economic operators with similar businesses or operations to those which
have made voluntary admissions;
• improve quality control of information submitted via the Irregularity
Management System (IMS); and
• plan and focus their audits and control activities based on risk analysis
and to use systems and tools such as Arachne, IMS and the Fraud Risk
Assessment Tool more systematically and efficiently.
Sixteenth Report of the European Anti-Fraud Office (1 January to 31 December 2015) 4.26 The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is an administrative investigative
service of the EU, with the remit of combating fraud, corruption and other
illegal activities affecting the EU, including serious misconduct within the EU
institutions that has financial consequences. It aims to ensure that EU
taxpayers’ money is spent appropriately and that the EU is not being
deprived of its due revenue.
4.27 OLAF’s operational activities are independent from the European
Commission and its internal (within the EU) and external (outside the EU)
investigations are conducted in full independence. It investigates cases of
fraud and provides assistance to the Commission and EU bodies and
national authorities in their fight against fraud. It works closely with national
authorities’ investigation services, police, legal and administrative authorities
to counter fraud. It also supports the Commission in developing anti-fraud
measures.
4.28 Every year, the OLAF Director publishes a report on the activities of the Office
over the previous year. The sixteenth report, issued in April 2016, gave a
27
summary of OLAF’s achievements in 2015, supported by statistics and case
studies.10
4.29 The following statistics were reported for 2015:
• 1,372 items of information were received in 2015 from public and private
sources;
• 219 investigations were opened in 2015;
• 364 recommendations were issued in 2015;
• structural funds accounted for the highest number of investigations; and
• €187.3 million (£136.0 million) was recovered in total as a result of
OLAF’s investigations.
4.30 In the policy field, OLAF continued to actively engage in a number of
projects, including:
• overall EU strategy against the illicit tobacco trade;
• contributing to legislative proposals to develop the EU’s anti-fraud policy;
and
• providing financial support to improve member states’ capacity to fight
fraud through the Hercule III programme.
4.31 In 2015, OLAF operated on an administrative budget of €57.7 million
(£41.9 million).
10 OLAF’s sixteenth activity report can be found at: https://ec.europa.eu/anti-fraud/sites/antifraud/files/olaf_report_2015_en.pdf
28
Chapter 5
Government strategy on using EU funds in the UK: an update
5.1 The government is fully committed to maintaining the greatest possible
transparency on the use of EU funds at a cross-government level. The 2016
annual statement, as part of The Treasury’s response to recommendations
from the Public Accounts Committee (PAC)1, set out the government‘s
strategy on using EU funds in the UK.
5.2 This year, this chapter summarises the strategy, including updates where
relevant, and sets out how the government is performing in its efforts to
minimise disallowance. It also highlights the assurances provided by the
government to provide certainty to recipients of EU funds whilst the UK
remains a member state.
5.3 Where relevant, this chapter focuses on Common Agricultural Policy and
European Structural and Investment Funds as collectively they constitute the
vast majority of UK public sector receipts from the EU budget (in 2016-17,
they accounted for 96% of UK public sector receipts) 2.
5.4 In accordance with the devolution settlement, relations with the EU are the
responsibility of Parliament and the government of the United Kingdom, as
the member state. Responsibility for implementing EU obligations relating to
devolved matters lies with the devolved administrations. The proper
administration of EU Funds in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales is a
matter for the relevant devolved administration, including in relation to
disallowance. This chapter and Annex D have been prepared with the main
focus on English government departments and without prejudice to the
devolution of these responsibilities.
5.5 Annex D contains detailed information relating to the use of EU funds within
the UK with data collated from a variety of publications, including
departmental annual reports and accounts. Where relevant, key data set out
in Annex D will be highlighted in this chapter, including on disallowance.
1 PAC report on the financial management of the EU budget in 2014 can be found at:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmpubacc/730/730.pdf;
The government response can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/treasury-minutes-november-2016
2 HMT figures, derived from Table 3.E. The Home Office, for example, also manages EU funds. However, disallowance relating to
those funds are not material to Home Office accounts. As set out in table 5.B, as at 31 March 2017 there were no disallowance
provisions relating to ‘Other’ funds.
29
Government strategy for using EU funds 5.6 The UK continues to have all of the rights, obligations and benefits that
membership of the EU brings, with respect to the EU Budget, up until the
point the UK leaves. While the UK remains a member state, the
government’s overall approach to the EU Budget continues to be to:
• minimise UK contributions to the Budget by arguing for budgetary
restraint at European level;
• maximise the value for money and impact of all EU spending by
constructively engaging in European-level discussions on how funds are
spent; and
• maximise the value for money and impact of EU spending that takes place
in the UK by implementing clear strategies relating to the use of EU funds.
5.7 Ultimate responsibility for implementing the EU Budget lies with the
European Commission. But in practice, some 80% of the EU Budget is spent
under what is known as 'shared management', with individual EU countries
distributing funds and managing expenditure in accordance with
agreements between member states and the European Commission, as well
as related legislation adopted by the EU and member states. Further
information on the auditing arrangements for the main shared management
funds can be found in Annex D.
5.8 Reflecting the different nature of the various funds in place, the government
has a series of strategies in place for the effective management of each of
the main EU funds in the UK. Where relevant for national allocations of EU
funds, strategy documents are agreed with the Commission at the beginning
of the programming period, setting out intended results and priorities to
achieve maximum value for money. These are agreed in line with both EU
and clearly defined domestic priorities, and typically reviewed at the mid-
point of each programming period to reflect the latest outlook on economic
and social positions.
30
Table 5.A: UK allocations for key EU funds under “shared management”
Fund 2014-20 allocation
(€ billion)
2014-20 allocation
(£ billion)3
European Agricultural Guarantee
Fund (EAGF) or Pillar 1 of Common
Agricultural Policy 4
22.7 20.1
European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF) + European Social Fund
(ESF) 5
10.8 9.6
European Agricultural Fund for Rural
Development (EARDF) 6
5.2
4.6
European Maritime and Fisheries
Fund (EMFF)
0.2 0.2
5.9 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Pillar 1, funded through the European
Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), primarily involves direct payments to
farmers and is the largest source of UK receipts. CAP in England is overseen
by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). The
Commission does not require strategic programming for EAGF, but DEFRA‘s
policy approach in England is set out in a series of formal consultation
responses, which take full account of the interests of the industry and other
relevant stakeholders, and reflects the government’s overall approach set out
above.7 DEFRA’s overall approach for using CAP receipts continues to be
based on commitments to:
• implement CAP in England in a way that, wherever possible, supports a
resilient and competitive English farming sector;
• simplify, wherever possible, the rules that farmers and other CAP
beneficiaries must adhere to;
• strengthen how the sector delivers outcomes for the public good,
primarily through rural development funds targeted at improving the
environment and growing the rural economy; and
• minimise overall implementation costs to government and the sector.
3 2018: £1 = €1.11271. This is the 29 December 2017 exchange rate, which is the rate at which all UK VAT-based and GNI-based
contributions, and the UK rebate, are being converted to sterling throughout 2018.
4 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32012R0671&from=EN; http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0994&from=EN; http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14561-2014-ADD-
1/en/pdf
5 European Structural and Investment Funds: UK Partnership Agreement: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/european-
structural-and-investment-funds-uk-partnership-agreement
6 http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14561-2014-ADD-1/en/pdf
7 https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/common-agricultural-policy-reform-implementation-in-england
31
5.10 European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), which include the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund
(ESF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD,
sometimes referred to as the second pillar of Common Agricultural Policy)
and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), make up the second
largest proportion of UK public sector receipts from the EU and involve
investment in the real economy by supporting job creation and economic
growth. The UK Partnership Agreement8 sets out the plans and priorities for
the deployment of these funds to complement EU and UK objectives on
sustainable jobs and growth, and again reflects the government’s overall
approach set out above. The Agreement was formed by working closely with
devolved administrations and with Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in
England. For the 2014-20 programming period, the UK decided that the
overall objectives for ESIFs would include:
• promoting sustainable and quality employment, and supporting labour
mobility;
• increasing the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs) and support entrepreneurism;
• improving the commercialisation of research and development, including
through encouraging more firms to innovate;
• contributing towards improving access to, use of and quality of
information and communications technology including improving
superfast broadband infrastructure;
• developing infrastructure, supporting low carbon transport solutions
particularly in urban areas, encouraging technological innovation and
promoting energy efficiency; and
• improving infrastructure in less developed regions where poor connectivity
contributes to market failure.
5.11 Underpinning the Partnership Agreement are detailed Operational
Programmes setting out the strategy and priorities for each fund in each of
the constituent nations along with information about management and
delivery. UK management of ESIFs has promoted value for money by: setting
consistent performance management standards across different
programmes; establishing a strategic framework for investments; and
prioritising local needs. For example, the ESF and ERDF Programmes include
a requirement for applicants to demonstrate quantitative and qualitative
aspects of value for money at the outline and full application stages and
through ongoing contract management arrangements over the lifetime of
the project.
5.12 The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has
overall policy responsibility for ESIFs across the UK and was responsible for
negotiating the UK’s Partnership Agreement with the Commission on behalf
8 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/european-structural-and-investment-funds-uk-partnership-agreement
32
of all the UK’s Managing Authorities, including the devolved administrations.
Managing Authorities are responsible for negotiating and implementing
individual Operational Programmes for each Fund. For England, the
Managing Authorities are: Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
Government (MHCLG) for ERDF; Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
for ESF, and DEFRA for EAFRD. The Marine Management Organisation
(MMO) manages the EMFF for the whole of the UK.
5.13 Annex D sets out historical information on the levels of EU expenditure in the
UK between 2010-11 and 2016-17 and breaks down this information by
fund and, where possible, between England and the devolved
administrations.
Government strategy for minimising disallowance
5.14 As part of their oversight of EU Budget spending, the Commission can
impose financial corrections on member states for failing to apply EU
Regulations correctly in managing and administering EU schemes. In such
circumstances, the EU reduces the amount paid to the member state. These
corrections are known as ‘disallowance’.
5.15 The government has taken, and will continue to take, the issue of
disallowance very seriously, especially in those areas that constitute a
material element of public spending in that policy area, such as CAP. As set
out in the November 2016 response to the PAC, the Treasury exercises close
oversight of the disallowance incurred by departments. For example, the
Treasury coordinates the annual UK response to the European Court of
Auditors (ECA) audit findings and, for financial errors identified by the ECA,
departments are required to respond to every case and implement any
required follow-up actions. Errors identified by the ECA do not necessarily
lead to actual disallowance, but the ECA’s findings are often followed up by
the European Commission’s conformity audits. The European Commission is
the only actor that can apply a financial correction.
5.16 The government strategy for managing down disallowance risks consists of:
• clear central oversight and clear lines of accountability through the
Treasury to departments;
• focussing efforts and investment on early identification of risks and
sharing best practice if appropriate; and
• engagement at departmental level with the European Commission to
advance the simplification agenda.
5.17 Robust governance and accountability arrangements are an integral part of
the government’s strategy for managing down the risk of financial
corrections. Individual departments are accountable for developing and
implementing strategies for managing expenditure risks. As part of this,
departments ensure all checks on EU spending are robust, monitoring the
results of audits to inform improvements. Departments and agencies
managing EU funds within England have been asked to identify the main
areas where they risk disallowance being imposed and implement measures
to address these. Appropriate measures will vary between departments and
33
funds, but below are examples of how DEFRA and BEIS, who have oversight
of the majority of public sector EU funds in the England, are minimising the
risk of disallowance.
CAP 5.18 Historically, no member state has achieved zero disallowance under the CAP
regime, illustrating the complexity of the schemes and the challenges and
costs of complying with them. However, DEFRA are committed to making
substantive progress and taking cost-effective action to minimise
disallowance. DEFRA’s strategy remains focused on the following areas:
• Assessing risk and prioritising actions: DEFRA maintain an up-to-date
picture of how they are meeting EU requirements in order to assess
disallowance risks for each scheme – a range of sources are used to do
this, including any emerging Commission guidance on the scheme rules.
This process aims to identify risks early and before they are detected by
Commission auditors. Efforts are focused on the Basic Payment Scheme,
cross compliance, Pillar 2, and Fruit and Vegetable Aid Scheme, as these
are the main areas of risk. Mitigation measures are then focussed on
addressing the major causes of possible disallowance and prioritised on
the basis of their likely impact, as well as how they fit with wider
government policy. The priorities are regularly updated, so as to reflect
the latest information, and to ensure efforts continue to be well targeted.
• Cost-effective investments: DEFRA invest in mitigation measures where
they are likely to save more in disallowance than they cost in
implementation. For example, the quality of mapping data, used to
administer CAP payments, has historically been the biggest cause of
disallowance. DEFRA are therefore investing in improving the mapping of
data, such as through the use of additional satellite imagery, in order to
minimise disallowance. DEFRA has also continued to make improvements
to its IT systems through the CAP Delivery Programme. This year, DEFRA
have made investments in the ongoing development of their payment
systems to improve claim processing and compliance with EU
requirements. Further, any new or amended EU regulations will be
implemented in the most cost-effective way possible, taking account of
disallowance risks and the views of stakeholders.
• Continued EU engagement: The CAP is governed by complex rules, which
drive up the risk and incidence of disallowance. DEFRA are continuing to
engage constructively with the Commission’s simplification exercise and
will continue to argue against new measures which would not be cost
effective to implement. DEFRA also challenge the Commission’s proposals
for disallowance where it believes that the proposals are disproportionate
relative to the risk to the fund, often resulting in lower disallowance being
applied. DEFRA also engages with other member states, exchanging
information about the scope and outcome of EU audits in order to
improve assessment of disallowance risks, such as through the Learning
Network of EU CAP Paying Agencies.
5.19 Progress in implementing DEFRA’s disallowance strategy is overseen by the
Department’s Disallowance Steering Group, which meets monthly, and
34
changes will continue to be made as necessary. It is important to note that
the impacts of mitigating actions can take time to flow through to results
and will not always be immediately visible. DEFRA recognises that minimising
disallowance requires a range of actions, and continues to engage with the
rest of government, the European Commission and other member states on
best practice.
ESIFs 5.20 BEIS works with the Managing Authorities (including DCLG, DWP and
DEFRA) and the devolved administrations to ensure that the ESIFs are
managed appropriately. Managing Authorities must demonstrate that they
comply with certain criteria set out in the ESIFs regulations. For example,
they must demonstrate that they have arrangements to train those involved
in implementation on state aid and public procurement law, since failure to
comply with these areas is a major cause of error. In order to ensure
compliance with the EU rules, and minimise disallowance, a range of
measures have been implemented, such as administrative simplification.
5.21 BEIS and Managing Authorities have put in place an early warning system to
identify potential disallowance quickly using the Partnership Agreement
Programme Board. This helps to share expertise between the Managing
Authorities and BEIS and to identify lessons learnt. The frequency of
Partnership Agreement Programme Board meetings has recently been
increased from biannually to quarterly, increasing the engagement between
Managing Authorities across the UK and opportunities to share best practice
in implementation. In addition, Managing Authorities are drawing on the
experiences from previous programming periods to counteract the risk of
disallowance. These include a strengthening of administrative and
on-the-spot control checks and checking all expenditure prior to paying out
to beneficiaries or reclaiming it from the Commission.
5.22 Projects are risk assessed and scored as part of approval, and, in most
Managing Authorities, a control plan is put in place with higher risk scores
leading to more intensive scrutiny. Verification checks of expenditure vary
between the Managing Authorities, but typically include desk checks, site
visits and expenditure checks by the Certifying Authority – which is
responsible for guaranteeing the accuracy and honesty of statements of
expenditure and requests for payments before they are sent to the European
Commission.
5.23 All types of verifications are carried out before expenditure is certified to the
Commission for re-imbursement and they must be sufficient to guarantee
that the expenditure certified is legal and regular. The Certifying Authority
also independently review verification activities to ensure the Managing
Authority has completed verifications as per their strategy.
5.24 Across all funds, a range of networks exist to share learning and best
practice both between UK authorities and with other member states, and
the UK will continue to participate in these while an EU member state. In
addition to domestic efforts, the UK will continue to engage with the EU
until exit. This includes working on the rules governing EU expenditure. The
UK continues to push for simplified rules across all areas of EU expenditure.
35
Many errors in EU spending are due to the complexities of the regulations
governing different programmes, therefore simplifying the rules will reduce
the number of errors and reduce the disallowance incurred.
Information on disallowance 5.25 As set out in last year’s statement, government departments publish
information about possible disallowance in their departmental annual
accounts and reports. A disallowance provision is recognised in
departmental accounts where there is a past event (for example an ineligible
payment or a failure to comply with the regulations) which is likely to lead to
the EU disallowing expenditure and not reimbursing the UK. The Treasury
monitors disallowance provisions.
5.26 Tables 5.B and 5.C sets out data from the 2016-17 and 2015-16
departmental accounts respectively including: provisions for future
corrections added to departmental accounts over the course of the relevant
financial year; provisions ‘released’ by departments during the year, which is
the value of provisions no longer expected to materialise into actual
disallowance; and provisions ‘utilised’ in year, which is the value of
provisions that are expected to materialise within 12 months (they are no
longer a future long-term liability, but are expected to be imposed by the
European Commission). The updated data set out in Table 5.B is discussed in
more detail in the next section of this chapter.
5.27 Whilst information on disallowance provisions can, to some extent, indicate
levels of likely disallowance, it is important to note that this information
cannot be used to identify trends or measure the success of related
strategies because:
• disallowance provisions added to Statements of Financial Position in any
given year can relate to activity that has taken place in a number of
previous years;
• disallowance can be challenged by departments and are sometimes
successfully overturned;
• as set out earlier in this chapter, disallowance is often illustrative of the
complexity of the regulations governing EU funds rather than any misuse
of funds, and disallowance may increase temporarily following the
introduction of new scheme rules;
• figures may not be directly comparable across funds, due to the different
ways in which funds work and different levels of complexity of the various
programmes; and
• there may be a lag between action being taken by a department to
reduce disallowance and the effect being observable.
5.28 Annex D sets out historical information on disallowance and provisions for
them. In subsequent annual statements, the government will continue to
provide updates on how the government is performing against the strategies
above, including in its efforts to minimise disallowance. In doing so, the
Treasury will draw on the information which departments already publish.
36
Updates on performance and minimising disallowance 5.29 At European level, on-going UK engagement with the EU institutions and
member states has led to a range of UK proposals on simplification and
harmonisation being included in the Commission’s proposed changes to EU
regulations. Some of these changes are likely to take effect before the UK
leaves the EU and support the effective use of EU funds in the UK. At the
domestic level, progress in using EU funds in this programming period is
being made, and initial updates on how departments are minimising
disallowance is available.
5.30 DEFRA has been delivering CAP Pillar 1 in line with the key principles
highlighted above since the beginning of the 2014-2020 programming
period. For example, in implementing greening requirements, which set out
environmental and ecological conditions for the use of funds, DEFRA has
taken advantage of the discretion member states have to implement EU rules
flexibly, and has provided a package of options which give farmers a choice
over how they comply with the rules.9
5.31 In relation to disallowance, the overall success of DEFRA’s strategy in
reducing these will not be known until the Commission concludes audits on
CAP expenditure for the relevant 2015-20 period. So far none of these audits
have concluded. However, in the last year, DEFRA have been successful in
reducing the disallowance in relation to the Rural Development Programme
for England for the financial year 2013-14: the Commission’s initial proposal
was for a disallowance of €22.5 million, but this was reduced to €2.3 million
due to DEFRA’s challenge. DEFRA will continue to challenge disallowance
proposals as needed.
5.32 As demonstrated by the data in Table 5.B, a significant portion of provisions
in 2016-17 continues to be related to agricultural policy funding and the
portion has indeed increased as at the Statement of Financial Position
(Balance Sheet) date of the 31 March 2017 – largely due to the size of the
fund and the complexity of the regulations. Disallowance was expected to be
high for CAP years 2015 and 2016 due to the implementation of new CAP
arrangements, which were complex and subject to an unknown Commission
approach. The new provisions entered in 2016-17 are in respect of Basic
Payment Scheme audits primarily relating to entitlements (required by
farmers claiming direct payments), as well as in relation to area aids and
cross compliance (rules for farmers and land managers claiming direct
payments). The provisions were previously published in Chapter 3 of DEFRA’s
Annual Report and Accounts for 2016/1710. Following engagement with the
Commission, DEFRA believe that the final disallowance associated with the
audit of 2015-16 Basic Payment Scheme entitlements will be less than the
original forecast which informed the provisions made. The current CAP
9 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cap-greening-criteria-announced
10 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/defras-annual-report-and-accounts-2016-to-2017
37
disallowance strategy reflects the latest intelligence from these processes and
will continue to be updated.
5.33 At the mid-point of the 2014-20 ESIFs, all of the UK’s ESIFs programmes
were progressing well. According to European Commission data, the United
Kingdom had the fourth highest rate of financial resources allocated to
selected projects across all member states. The total payments to the UK
across all ESIFs has also been above the EU average for each of 2015, 2016
and 2017.11 In addition, as at the end of November 2017, all but one of the
UK’s Managing Authorities had been formally designated. At the mid-way
point, ESF had approximately half of the England allocation committed,
funding 450 projects. For ERDF, as of the end of October 2017, 470 projects
had been contracted valuing £1,246 million (meaning approximately 43% of
the programme had been contracted).
5.34 Although it is early days in terms of verification activity, during calendar year
ending 2017, on-the-spot verification activities identified some issues with
plans relating to cross cutting themes in ESF and data retention in ERDF and
ESF. Cross-cutting themes and document retention guidance was issued in
February 2017 and all verification managers ensure project managers
understand these Regulatory requirements. In terms of disallowance, the
ESIFs strategy is working effective at this stage. Table 5.B shows that in
2016-17 there were some – relatively small – disallowance provisions relating
to the European Social Fund.
Certainty for beneficiaries of EU funds 5.35 The government has been clear that British businesses, farmers and other
organisations can continue to apply for EU funds and benefit from them
while the UK remains a member state. In October 2016, the Chancellor
announced that the government will guarantee ESIFs projects, including
agri-environment schemes, which are signed while the UK remains a
member state, even if projects run on after the UK has left the EU12.
5.36 Funding for ESIFs projects in England will be honoured by the government if
they are good value for money and are in line with domestic priorities.
Government departments will take responsibility for allocating money to
projects in line with these conditions. Where the devolved administrations
sign up to ESIFs projects under their current EU budget allocation prior to
the UK’s exit from the EU, the government will ensure they are funded to
meet these commitments.
5.37 In the non-ESIFs funding streams, the Chancellor guaranteed that the
current level of agricultural funding under Common Agricultural Policy Pillar
1 will be upheld until 2020, as part of the transition to new arrangements.
Earlier in 201613, the Chancellor also provided assurances that UK businesses
and universities should continue to bid for competitive EU funds while the
UK remains a member of the EU and the government will work with the
11 European Structural and Investment Funds data: https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/countries
12 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/further-certainty-on-eu-funding-for-hundreds-of-british-projects
13 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-philip-hammond-guarantes-eu-funding-beyond-date-uk-leaves-the-eu
38
Commission to ensure payment when funds are awarded. The Treasury will
underwrite the payment of such awards, even when specific projects
continue beyond the UK’s departure from the EU.
5.38 More recently, the UK’s withdrawal negotiations has provided further
certainty for UK beneficiaries. As set out in the joint report on progress
during phase 1 of negotiations under Article 50 on the United Kingdom’s
orderly withdrawal from the European Union14, following withdrawal from
the Union the UK will continue to participate in the Union programmes
financed by the MFF 2014-2020 until their closure. Entities located in the UK
will be fully entitled to participate in such programmes.
14
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665869/Joint_report_on_progress_during_phase_1_o
f_negotiations_under_Article_50_TEU_on_the_United_Kingdom_s_orderly_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union.pdf
39
Table 5.B: Provisions in England and devolved administrations (DAs) for future financial corrections 2016-17
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England1 DAs2 England3 DAs4 England5 DAs6 England DAs England DAs
As at 1 April 2016 -17,638 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 -1,198 0 0 -17,638 -16,542
Created during the year -229,572 -120 0 0 0 0 0 0 -229,572 -120
Released in year 0 0 0 0 0 1,198 0 0 0 1,198
Utilised 2,772 1,012 0 13,332 0 0 0 0 2,772 14,344
As at 31 March 2017 -244,438 -120 0 -1,000 0 0 0 0 -244,438 -1,120
Total UK as at 31 March 2017 -244,558 -1,000 0 0 -245,558
Notes:
In England: agricultural funding is primarily the responsibility of the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, included in agricultural funding figures, is the
responsibility of the Marine Management Organisation, an executive non-departmental public body sponsored by DEFRA); the European Social Fund is the responsibility of the Department for Work and Pensions; the
European Regional Development Fund is the responsibility of Department for Communities and Local Government. ‘Other’ contains small funds, such as the Asylum, Migration, and Integration Fund (AMIF), which is the
responsibility of the Home Office. As at 31 March 2017, there were no provisions relating to ‘Other’ funds).
The DAs are responsible for implementing EU obligations relating to devolved matters.
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/defras-annual-report-and-accounts-2016-to-2017 (this includes the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund)
2 https://beta.gov.scot/publications/scottish-government-consolidated-accounts-year-ended-31-march-2017/ (included in Other Provisions’ aggregate of note 12.a of the accounts)
3 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dwp-annual-report-and-accounts-2016-to-2017(no provisions reported)
4 https://beta.gov.scot/publications/scottish-government-consolidated-accounts-year-ended-31-march-2017/
5 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dclg-annual-report-and-accounts-2016-to-2017 (no provisions reported)
6 https://beta.gov.scot/publications/scottish-government-consolidated-accounts-year-ended-31-march-2017/
40
Table 5.C: Provisions in England and devolved administrations (DAs) for future financial corrections 2015-16 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England7 DAs8 England9 DAs10 England11 DAs12 England13 DAs England DAs
As at 1 April 2015 -64,513 0 0 0 0 -1,198 -632 0 -65,145 -1,198
Created during the year -17,224 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 0 0 0 -17,224 -15,344
Released in year 0 0 0 0 0 0 335 0 335 0
Utilised 64,099 0 0 0 0 0 297 0 64,396 0
As at 31 March 2016 -17,638 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 -1,198 0 0 -17,638 -16,542
Total UK as at 31 March 2016 -18,650 -14,332 -1,198 0 -34,180
Note:
As at 31 March 2016, there were no provisions relating to ‘Other’ funds (as at 1 April 2015, provisions relating to ‘Other’ funds represented less than 1% of all disallowance provisions).
7 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/defras-annual-report-and-accounts-2015-to-2016 (this includes the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund)
8 http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0050/00506453.pdf (included in ‘other provisions’ aggregate)
9 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/534933/dwp-annual-report-and-accounts-2015-2016.pdf (no provisions reported)
10 http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0050/00506453.pdf
11 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/536593/56046_DCLG_ARA_Web_only.pdf (no provisions reported)
12 http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00486683.pdf (restatement of prior year figure and included in ‘other provisions’ aggregate in 2014-15 accounts)
13 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/539638/HO_AR_16_gov.pdf (restatement of prior year figure and included in overall departmental provisions’ aggregate)
41
Annex A
Glossary
Commitment and payment appropriations A.1 The EU Budget distinguishes between appropriations for commitments and
appropriations for payments. Commitment appropriations are the total cost
of legal obligations that can be entered into during the current year, for
activities that, in turn, will lead to payments in current and future years.
Payment appropriations are the amounts of money that are available to be
spent during the year, arising from commitments in the Budgets for the
current or preceding years. Unused payment appropriations may, in some
circumstances, be carried forward into the following year.
Discharge procedure A.2 The ECA’s annual report is subject to consideration by the budgetary
authority (Council and European Parliament) under the “discharge
procedure” set out in Article 319 of the Treaty on the functioning of the EU1.
In particular, it considers how the budget for the year in question was
implemented. The European Parliament, acting on a recommendation from
the Council, considers whether to grant the Commission a discharge in
respect of the budget in question, thus bringing the budgetary process for
that year to a formal close. The Commission is obliged under Article 319 (3)
of the Treaty on the functioning of the EU to take “all appropriate steps” to
act on comments made by the European Parliament and by the Council
during the discharge process. It must also report back to the budgetary
authority on follow-up actions taken in response to Parliament and Council’s
recommendations.
Error in EU Budget expenditure A.3 The European Court of Auditors (ECA), established to audit the EU’s
finances, provide annual statements on the legality and regularity of the
transactions underlying EU spending. A summary of the statement for
Budget year 2015 is set out in chapter 4. As part of their statement, the ECA
estimates the level of error present in EU Budget expenditure, due to it not
being used in accordance with EU rules. Whilst the ECA calculate error rates
for the EU Budget as a whole, they are clear that they only sample a limited
number of transactions in each member state and the “relative frequency of
1 Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT&from=en
42
error in samples drawn in different member states cannot be a guide to the
relative level of error in different member states”. The errors identified by the
ECA do not necessary lead to actual disallowance. More information on
disallowance in the UK is contained in chapter 5.
European Structural and Investment Funds A.4 European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) are intended to resolve
structural economic and social problems. For the 2014-20 programming
period, the Common Provisions Regulation sets out the guiding principles for
administering the funds. At present, these funds are:
• the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), which promotes
economic and social cohesion within the EU through the reduction of
imbalances between regions or social groups;
• the European Social Fund (ESF), which promotes the EU’s employment
objectives by providing financial assistance for vocational training,
retraining and job creation schemes;
• the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), which
contributes to the structural reform of the agriculture sector and to the
development of rural areas;
• the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the specific fund for
the structural reform of the fisheries sector; and
• the Cohesion Fund (CF), which supports member states with GDP that is
less than 90% of the European average, financing environmental and
trans-European transport projects.
Flexibility Instrument A.5 The Flexibility Instrument was established under paragraph 24 of the 1999
Inter-institutional Agreement2 and amended as part of the Mid-Term Review
of the MFF3. This allows for expenditure in any given Budget year of up to
€600 million (2011 prices) above the MFF ceilings established for one or
more Budget headings. The amount available is also increased annually by
the amount of EU Solidarity Fund and EU Globalisation Adjustment Fund
allocations which lapse (or are unused) in the previous year. Any portion of
the Flexibility Instrument unused at the end of one year may be carried over
for up to three subsequent years. The Flexibility Instrument is intended ‘to
allow the financing, for a given financial year, of clearly identified
expenditure which could not be financed within the limits of the ceilings
available for one or more other headings’.4 It may only be used after all
possibilities for reallocating existing appropriations have been exhausted.
2 Inter-institutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary
discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:31999Y0618(02)
3 Amending regulation: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017R1123&from=EN
4 Regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013R1311
43
Both arms of the budgetary authority must agree to a mobilisation of the
Flexibility Instrument following a proposal from the Commission.
Fraud and irregularity A.6 Fraud covers intentional acts or omissions, in respect of both expenditure
and revenue, which involve the use or presentation of false, incorrect or
incomplete statements or documents, or specific non-disclosure of
information, or misapplication of funds or benefits.
A.7 Irregularity (as defined by Council Regulation 2988/95) covers ‘any
infringement of a provision of Community law’ caused by an act or omission
which leads to reduction in EU revenue, or loss or misspending of EU funds.
Irregularities are distinct from fraud in that they are financial errors as
opposed to intentional, criminal misuse of funds. For example, a genuine
payment made after the closing date for claims represents an irregularity;
but import of goods under false papers is fraud.
Inter Institutional Agreement (IIA) A.8 The IIA is a politically and legally binding agreement that clarifies the EU’s
budgetary procedure. The Council and the European Parliament have joint
responsibility for deciding the EU Budget on the basis of proposals from the
Commission. The IIA sets out the way in which the three institutions will
exercise their responsibilities and their respect for the revenue ceilings that
are laid down in the Own Resources Decision. In particular, it provides for
the annual EU Budget to be set in the context of an MFF.
Own Resources A.9 The Own Resources Decision lays down three sources of EU revenue, or
‘Own Resources’:
• customs duties, including those on agricultural products, in respect of
trade with non-member countries and levies on sugar production within
the Union. These are collectively known as “Traditional Own Resources”
(TOR);
• contributions based on VAT: Essentially, the VAT resource is the amount
yielded by applying a notional rate of 1% to a hypothetical harmonised
VAT base, assuming an identical range of goods and services in each
member state. The VAT base is calculated on the basis of a notional
harmonised rate and reflects finally taxed expenditure across the EU. The
base is capped at 50% of the member state’s GNI. A call-up rate is
applied to produce a member states’ VAT-based contribution. This is
currently 0.3%, except otherwise noted in the Own Resources Decision;
and
• GNI-based contributions: the amount due is calculated by taking the same
proportion of each member state’s GNI. As EU budgets must balance,
revenue must equal expenditure. The GNI-based resource is the Budget-
balancing item; it covers the difference between total expenditure in the
44
Budget and the revenue from the other resources, subject to the overall
Own Resources ceiling.
Sterling figures A.10 The figures referred to in pounds sterling for 2010-16 in this document are
based on actual Sterling cash receipts, or payments where these took place
and are known. Elsewhere, the appropriate annual average sterling/euro
exchange rate has been used to convert Euro figures into Sterling5. The 2017
Euro figures have been converted into Sterling using the Sterling/Euro
exchange rate on 30 December 2016, namely £1=€1.16798 (regulations
state that VAT-based and GNI-based payments will be made using the
exchange rate on the last working day of the preceding year). However,
there may be some exceptions, for example where figures have previously
been published at a different exchange rate, but these are noted where
necessary.
UK rebate A.11 The UK’s GNI-based contributions are abated (reduced) according to a
formula set out in the Own Resources Decision. Broadly, this is equal to 66%
of the difference between what the UK contributes to the EU Budget and its
receipts from the EU Budget, subject to the following points:
• the rebate applies only in respect of spending within the EU;
• the UK’s contribution is calculated as if the Budget were only financed by
TOR and VAT-based contributions;
• the rebate is deducted from the UK’s GNI-based contribution a year in
arrears, e.g. the rebate in 2015 relates to UK payments and receipts in
2014; and
• since 2011 the UK’s contributions to non-agricultural expenditure in
member states that have acceded to the EU in or after 2004 are not
abated – this reflects the agreement by the UK government in 2005 to
“disapply” the UK rebate on non-agricultural expenditure in new member
states.
A.12 The formula for the calculation of the rebate is set out in the Own Resources
Decision and in a Working Methods Paper first published in 1988 and
revised in 1994, 2000, 2007 and 2014.
A.13 The Commission is directly and solely responsible for calculating the UK’s
rebate. It calculates the rebate on the basis of a forecast of contributions to
the EU Budget and the UK’s receipts from it. This is subsequently corrected
in the light of outturn figures.
5 The annual average rate for 2010 is £1 = €1.166206; the annual average rate for 2011 is £1 = €1.152493; the annual average
rate for 2012 is £1 = €1.233211; the annual average rate for 2013 is £1 = €1.177910; the annual average rate for 2014 is £1 =
€1.240977; the annual average rate for 2015 is £1 = €1.377415; the annual average rate for 2016 is £1 = €1.220286.
45
A.14 Corrections may be made for up to three years after the year in respect of
which the rebate relates, with a final calculation then being made in the
fourth year, e.g. a final calculation of the rebate in respect of 2015 will take
place in 2019.
A.15 The effect of the rebate is to reduce the amount of the UK’s monthly GNI-
based payments to the EU Budget. It does not involve any transfer of money
from the Commission or other member states to the Exchequer.
46
Annex B
Technical annex
Explanation of the difference between the government’s cash flow outturn for the UK’s net contribution for 2015 and the figures in the European Commission’s EU Budget 2015 Financial Report
B.1 As set out in Chapter 3, paragraph 3.10, there is a difference between the
UK government’s figures for the cash flow outturn for the UK’s net
contribution for 2015 and the figures in the European Commission’s EU
Budget 2015 Financial Report. An explanation for this difference is set out in
Table B.1, Table B.2 and paragraphs B.3 to B.4.
B.2 When converted at the average exchange rate for 2015 of £1= €1.377415,
the figures on cash flow outturn for the UK’s net contribution for 2015 in
the European Commission’s EU Budget 2015 Financial Report break down as
set out in Table B.1.
Table B.1: Cash flow outturn for the UK’s net contribution for 2015 in the European Commission’s EU Budget 2015 Financial Report
(€ million) (£ million)
UK gross contribution before rebate 27,493 19,960
UK rebate -6,084 -4,417
UK receipts -7,458 -5,414
UK net contribution 13,952 10,129
Source: European Commission’s EU Budget 2015 Financial Report, HM Treasury calculations.
B.3 The government’s figure for the UK’s net contribution in 2015 is £10,763
million.
B.4 A number of factors contribute to the difference between the two net
contribution figures. The probable main causes for the difference are as
follows:
• the UK figure includes only transactions between the EU Budget and the
UK public sector, whereas the European Commission’s figures include
47
receipts paid direct to the UK private sector. It is estimated that this
accounted for around £1,531 million of the difference in 2015;
• the UK’s outturn figure is based on cash flow within the calendar year,
whereas the European Commission figures attempt to match transactions
to a particular EU Budget. When reconciling there may be other factors
such as the exchange rate that can lead to differences between the
outturns;
• Amending Budgets No.s 2/2014 to 7/2014 were adopted very near the
end of 2014 which meant that associated changes were not implemented
until 2015. The result of which leads to the government’s figures being
some £1,247 million lower than if the Amending Budget changes had
been implemented in 2014;
• Amending Budget No. 8/2015 was adopted very near the end of 2015
which meant that associated changes were not implemented until 2016.
The result of which leads to the government’s figures being some £469
million higher than if the Amending Budget changes had been
implemented in 2015; and
• the UK government outturn accrues the UK’s adjustment in respect of the
2014 GNI and VAT adjustment, i.e. the outturn incorporates both the
UK’s gross adjustment and the repayments made to the UK made via
subsequent amending budgets, into 2014 outturn. The UK’s rebate was
also applied to our net adjustments, but the rebate paid to the UK is
included in the overall rebate line for 2015, the same year that the net
adjustment was actually paid following its deferral.
These factors are set out in Table B.2.
48
Table B.2: Reconciliation of the UK government’s cash flow outturn figures for the UK’s net contribution for 2015 with the figures in the European Commission’s EU Budget 2015 Financial Report
(£ million)
UK government outturn for 2015 10,763
Private sector receipts -1,531
Late implementation, in February 2015, of Amending Budgets Nos. 2/2014 -
7/2014
1,247
Late implementation, in January 2016, of Amending Budget No 8/2015 -469
2014 surcharge accrual 1,631
UK cash flow figure adjusted to reflect main differences compared to European
Commission’s figure
11,641
European Commission figure for 2015 outturn 10,129
Net difference due to other factors (e.g. exchange rate) 1,512
Source: HM Treasury calculations and 2015 EU Budget Financial Report, European Commission.
49
Annex C
Tables
C.1 This annex includes tables that supplement data presented in the main text.
50
Table C.1: Expenditure on the EU Budget Commitments and Payments by Heading in years 2010-2017 (€ million)
€ million
Appropriations Commitments Payments
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
1 Smart and Inclusive Growth 64,250 64,505 68,142 70,749 63,986 77,955 69,841 75,399 48,800 53,994 60,287 69,127 65,863 66,854 59,291 49,393
1a Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs 14,863 13,521 15,389 15,641 16,484 17,552 19,010 21,312 11,339 11,604 11,971 12,612 11,857 15,729 17,402 19,321
1b Economic, social and territorial cohesion 49,387 50,984 52,753 55,108 47,502 60,403 50,831 54,087 37,461 42,390 48,504 56,473 54,006 51,125 41,888 30,073
2 Sustainable Growth: natural resources 59,499 58,659 59,850 60,102 59,191 63,877 62,470 58,569 57,020 55,794 58,016 58,036 55,959 55,979 54,972 54,121
3 Security and Citizenship 1,754 2,098 2,754 2,197 2,172 2,522 4,292 4,284 1,440 1,713 2,214 1,699 1,660 1,927 3,022 3,224
4 Global Europe 8,141 8,759 9,404 9,315 8,423 8,711 9,167 10,437 7,788 7,053 6,777 6,743 6,925 7,478 10,156 9,056
5 Administration 7,908 8,173 8,280 8,431 8,405 8,660 8,951 9,395 7,907 8,172 8,278 8,429 8,406 8,659 8,951 9,395
TOTAL 141,552 142,194 148,428 152,048 142,690 162,273 155,277 159,831 122,955 126,727 135,758 144,451 139,034 141,280 136,642 126,771
Notes:
1. 2010-16 include all agreed Amending Budgets.
2. Column totals do not necessarily equal the sum of individual items due to rounding errors and spending not attributable to any heading.
Sources: Figures for 2010 to 2016 are taken from the European Commission’s Reports on budgetary and financial management; Figures for 2017 are taken from the Draft Amending Budget No. 6/2017:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0597&from=EN
51
Table C.2: Expenditure on the EU Budget Commitments and Payments by Heading in years 2010-2017 (£ million)
£ million
Appropriations Commitments Payments
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
1 Smart and Inclusive Growth 55,093 55,970 55,256 60,063 51,561 56,595 57,233 64,555 41,845 46,850 48,886 58,686 53,074 48,536 48,588 42,289
1a Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs 12,745 11,732 12,479 13,279 13,283 12,743 15,578 18,247 9,723 10,069 9,707 10,707 9,555 11,419 14,261 16,542
1b Economic, social and territorial cohesion 42,348 44,238 42,777 46,785 38,278 43,852 41,655 46,308 32,122 36,781 39,331 47,943 43,519 37,117 34,326 25,748
2 Sustainable Growth: natural resources 51,019 50,897 48,532 51,024 47,697 46,375 51,193 50,146 48,894 48,412 47,045 49,270 45,093 40,641 45,048 46,337
3 Security and Citizenship 1,504 1,820 2,233 1,865 1,750 1,831 3,517 3,668 1,235 1,486 1,795 1,442 1,338 1,399 2,476 2,761
4 Global Europe 6,981 7,600 7,626 7,908 6,787 6,324 7,512 8,936 6,678 6,120 5,495 5,725 5,580 5,429 8,323 7,754
5 Administration 6,781 7,092 6,714 7,158 6,773 6,287 7,335 8,043 6,780 7,091 6,713 7,156 6,774 6,286 7,335 8,043
TOTAL 121,378 123,379 120,359 129,083 114,982 117,810 127,246 136,844 105,432 109,959 110,085 122,633 112,036 102,569 111,975 108,538
Notes:
1. 2010-16 includes all agreed Amending Budgets.
2. Column totals do not necessarily equal the sum of individual items due to rounding errors and spending not attributable to any heading.
Source: Sterling figures are derived from the corresponding euro amounts in Table C.1 converted at the appropriate exchange rate (see Annex 1: Glossary).
52
Table C.3: United Kingdom contributions to, rebate, and public sector receipts from the EU Budget
€ million £ million
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
GROSS CONTRIBUTIONS
Sugar levies 9 13 11 2 10 9 10 8 10 9 2 7 7 9
Customs Duties 2,554 2,703 2,557 2,775 3,192 2,997 3,695 2,216 2,192 2,171 2,236 2,318 2,456 3,163
VAT–based contributions 2,505 2,811 2,761 2,963 3,665 3,266 3,551 2,174 2,279 2,344 2,388 2,661 2,677 3,040
GNI-based contributions 12,588 14,012 15,899 15,539 19,288 14,468 14,196 10,922 11,362 13,497 12,521 14,003 11,856 12,154
VAT & GNI adjustments 42 -121 134 2,024 786 - 302 36 -98 114 1,631 571 - 258
United Kingdom rebate -3,623 -3,835 -4,328 -5,481 -6,768 -4,732 -6,579 -3,143 -3,110 -3,674 -4,416 -4,914 -3,878 -5,633
Total Contributions 14,076 15,583 17,034 17,822 20,174 16,008 15,175 12,214 12,636 14,461 14,362 14,646 13,118 12,993
PUBLIC SECTOR RECEIPTS
EAGF 3,073 3,395 3,236 3,395 3,251 2,766 3,175 2,667 2,753 2,747 2,736 2,361 2,267 2,719
EAFRD 483 359 729 529 637 488 739 419 291 619 426 462 400 633
European Regional Development Fund 698 540 350 1,311 625 439 334 605 438 297 1,057 454 360 286
European Social Fund 448 721 290 331 780 376 165 389 585 246 266 566 308 142
Other Receipts 60 126 102 122 55 192 356 52 102 86 98 40 157 304
Total Receipts 4,762 5,141 4,707 5,688 5,348 4,261 4,770 4,132 4,169 3,996 4,583 3,883 3,492 4,084
Net Contributions 9,315 10,442 12,327 12,135 14,825 11,747 10,405 8,082 8,467 10,465 9,779 10,763 9,626 8,909
Notes: 1. For all years, the amounts for the UK's gross contribution in this table reflect payments made during the calendar year, not payments to particular EU Budgets. Prior to 2010, the Sugar Levies row also includes figures for duties on agricultural products. 2. Euro figures in this table have been converted from sterling using the appropriate exchange rate (see glossary). Because of rounding, the column totals do not necessarily equal the sum of the individual items. 3. The VAT and GNI adjustment figure for 2014 include the UK’s net adjustment, i.e. the figure incorporates both the UK’s gross adjustment and the repayments made to the UK made via subsequent amending budgets. The UK’s rebate was also applied to our net adjustments, but the impact of our rebate is not shown in the VAT and GNI line. For the 2014 adjustment, the rebate paid to the UK is included in the overall rebate line for 2015, the same year that the net adjustment was actually paid following its deferral. For the 2015 adjustment, details were set out in a letter to the Parliamentary Scrutiny Committees: http://europeanmemoranda.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/files/2015/10/DOC211015-21102015124206.pdf. Figures for the VAT and GNI adjustments outside 2014 refer to the gross adjustment, as in those years there were no specific amending budgets to make the repayments.
Source: Office for Budgetary Responsibility and HM Treasury.
53
Annex D
Report on the use of EU funds in the UK
Background D.1 This annex is linked to, and has cross references with, Chapter 5 on the
government strategy for using EU funds in the UK: an update. As part of
ongoing work to improve the accountability for, and transparency of, EU
funds, this annex is produced to collate and present data from a variety of
publications on the use of EU funds in the UK.
D.2 The publication of this report strengthens Parliamentary scrutiny of the
financial relationship between the EU and the UK government. It is compiled
by working with the NAO, Paying Agencies and Managing Authorities. The
Report draws on well-established data collection and assurance systems and
processes to raise the quality of the financial information collected, as well as
improving the consistency of accountancy policies applied.
D.3 The government is committed to maintaining the greatest possible
transparency on the use of EU funds at an aggregated level by publishing
information such as this.
Responsibilities of the UK Parliament and devolved administrations D.4 As highlighted in Chapter 5, in accordance with the devolution settlement,
relations with the EU are the responsibility of Parliament and the
government of the United Kingdom, as a member state. Responsibility for
implementing EU obligations relating to devolved matters lies with the
devolved administrations. The proper administration of EU Funds in Northern
Ireland, Scotland and Wales is a matter for the relevant devolved
administration. This report is prepared without prejudice to the devolution of
responsibilities.
Preparation of the report D.5 The Treasury has assumed responsibility for developing the format of this
report and for collating the financial data provided by Paying Agencies and
Managing Authorities which it includes. Managing Authorities are the
bodies which have responsibility for managing the payment of EU
programme funds to final beneficiaries in the UK.
54
D.6 Paying Agencies and Managing Authorities, however, remain accountable
for the propriety of the reported spending, which is publicly disclosed in
their annual report and accounts and is subject to external audit. This report
therefore brings together financial information relating to the use of EU
funds by the UK but does not replace individual accountabilities. The
Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) has not been invited to audit this
report although the individual annual report and accounts from which the
source data is collated are audited by the C&AG.
D.7 By bringing together this financial information, the report supports greater
scrutiny of the UK’s management of EU funds and of the financial
relationship between the UK and the EU.
Boundary of the report D.8 The report shows expenditure on co-managed EU schemes in the UK and the
corresponding income due from the EU. The main schemes for which the EU
and UK share management responsibility are the disbursement of Common
Agricultural Policy Funds and the European Structural and Investment Funds,
where the UK pays beneficiaries on behalf of the EU.
D.9 The report excludes:
• amounts received from the EU where UK central government is the
beneficiary;
• amounts in respect of commercial contracts awarded to UK central
government bodies by the EU;
• financial support for twinning projects where EU funding is transferred to
other member states or to mandated bodies for their part in the project1 –
those transactions are not reported as income and expenditure of the
relevant Managing Authority; and
• the purchase of intervention stocks with UK funds which are accounted
for in the financial statements of the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)2.
Management of EU funded schemes D.10 The Treaty establishing the EU provides the basic framework for its Budget.
The Budget includes a number of separate funds, including the European
Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the European Agricultural Fund
for Rural Development (EAFRD and sometimes referred to as the second
pillar of Common Agricultural Policy) and the European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund (EMFF).
1 Twinning projects are EU funded projects that support the capacity building in new member states or the Candidate Countries.
They are delivered by the public sector, usually by central government. These are funded through pre-accession funds.
2 Intervention stocks are stocks held by paying agencies in the EU as a result of intervention buying of commodities subject to
market support. Intervention stocks may be released onto the internal markets if internal prices exceed intervention prices; otherwise,
they may be sold on the world market.
55
D.11 These schemes are overseen by the European Commission. Responsibility for
financial reporting to the Commission falls to national authorities who are
responsible for the co-management of schemes with Managing Authorities.
D.12 The Commission can impose disallowance on Managing Authorities for
failing to correctly apply EU Regulations in managing and administering EU
schemes. In such circumstances the EU reduces the amount paid to the UK.
(a) Agricultural Policy Funds
D.13 The Single Payment Scheme (SPS) was the main agricultural subsidy scheme
in the EU, funded by the EAGF. It was replaced by the Basic Payment Scheme
in January 2015.
D.14 Under EU Regulation 907/2014, each paying agency must have an internal
audit service independent of the other departments that reports directly to
the Head of the paying agency. Paying agencies are the bodies of a member
state responsible for disseminating payments of EU funds to approved
programmes, keeping accurate information on these payments and
guaranteeing that EU legislation is complied with. The internal audit services
are required to verify that the procedures adopted by the agency are
adequate to ensure compliance with Union rules and that accounts are
accurate, complete and timely.
D.15 The Certification Body for the agricultural funds are appointed external
auditors that report on: whether the annual accounts of the paying agencies
are in all material respects true, complete and accurate; that internal control
procedures have operated satisfactorily; the legality and regularity of
expenditure and; the assertions made in the annual Management
Declarations made by the heads of paying agencies. The Certification Body
reports have confirmed that internal audit units in all the UK paying agencies
operate to a high standard, although they have in turn highlighted issues
that require appropriate remedial action to avoid disallowance.
(b) European Structural and Investment Funds
D.16 The European Structural and Investment Funds are the financial tools set up
to implement cohesion policy in the EU, and include ERDF, ESF, EAFRD and
EMFF. For more details on these programmes please refer to the Glossary of
this document.
D.17 The Managing Authorities are responsible for the control of European
Structural and Investment Fund expenditure. Working alongside each fund’s
Managing Authority, the fund’s Certifying Authority ensures that all systems
are subject to regular examination by the Audit Authority. The Audit
Authority results strengthen procedures during the implementation of
programmes and provide assurance as to the accuracy, completeness and
regularity of expenditure, certified to the European Commission.
56
Timing of expenditure and the related EU funding D.18 Managing Authorities are required to account for expenditure on EU-funded
schemes and the related funding from the EU on an accruals basis under
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as applied to the public
sector context by the Government Financial Reporting Manual (FReM). By
contrast, the public sector receipts in Table C.3 are reported on a cash basis.
D.19 There is normally a time lag between payment to beneficiaries and
settlement of claims by the EU. The UK Exchequer therefore bears the cost of
the programme until EU funding is received. Expenditure is recognised as it
is incurred, with a matching receivable (debtor) from the EU. The receivable
is extinguished when the EU approves the subsequent claim and the release
of funds to the UK.
D.20 The final settlement of claims by the EU may give rise to adjustments
following the closure process or disallowance (see paragraphs D.33 to D.35
below). The European Commission may make such adjustments several years
after funds have been paid out by Managing Authorities to recipients. The
Expenditure Statement below also includes provisions for possible future
adjustments. A provision is made where it is probable that the EU will
disallow expenditure and not reimburse the UK (see paragraph D.32 below).
Management of EU funded schemes
Expenditure on EU funded schemes
D.21 This section of the document covers the expenditure on EU funded schemes
between 2010-11 and 2016-17.
D.22 The Expenditure Statement (Table D.1) shows the EU funded element of
amounts paid out by UK central government bodies on projects supported
wholly or partially by the EU on which the UK anticipates EU funding at the
point the payment is made.
D.23 Gross expenditure on EU supported projects is recognised in the period in
which it becomes payable by UK central government to the recipient under
the rules of the relevant scheme. The amount shown in the Expenditure
Statement represents the amount paid and payable in Sterling during the
period to beneficiaries.
D.24 Net expenditure represents the amount receivable from the EU in respect of
amounts paid or payable by the UK on EU supported projects, after taking
account of provisions for disallowance, foreign exchange gains or losses and
withdrawals from claims.
D.25 The Statement of Assets and Liabilities (Table D.2) shows those assets and
liabilities that stem from cash flows, where, for example, the UK has paid a
claim from a beneficiary and is awaiting reimbursement from the EU. The
disallowance provision relates to amounts paid out by the UK for which it
believes it probable that the EU will apply financial corrections and not fully
reimburse the UK.
57
D.26 The Expenditure Statement (Table D.1) shows gross expenditure on EU-
supported schemes from 2010-11 to 2016-17. After allowing for foreign
exchange variations and adjustments to claims, the amount reimbursable by
the EU (i.e. net expenditure) was £4.3 billion in 2010-11, £4.7 billion in
2011-12, £4.2 billion in 2012-13, £4.4 billion in 2013-14, £4.3 billion in
2014-15, £3.8 billion in 2015-16, and £3.5 billion in 2016-17, the balance
being met by the UK Exchequer. Prior years have been restated where
necessary to amend previously published figures in order to reflect the
correction of errors, new information that has arisen or a change in accounting
policy. A breakdown of expenditure by scheme is provided in Tables D.3 to
D.9.
D.27 In recognition of likely future funding adjustments, Managing Authorities
made new provisions totalling £229.7 million in 2016-17, against claims for
reimbursement from the EU. After allowing for the use of provisions
following the crystallisation of adjustments, total provisions at 31 March
2017 amounted to £245.6 million, over £67.7 million more than the
corresponding figure at the end of the 2010-11 financial year. A breakdown
of the movement in provisions by scheme is provided in Tables D.10 to D.16.
58
Expenditure Statement Table D.1: Expenditure Statement for the years ended 31 March 2011 to 31 March 2017 (prior years restated) (£ thousand)
£ thousand
2011-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17*
Gross
expenditure on
EU supported
projects
4,397,505 4,773, 977 4,216,794 4,345,271 4,254,226 3,795,783 3,711,591
Provisions
created in year -75,006 -92,647 -34,850 -1,832 -21,459 -32,568 -229,692
Provisions
released in
year
19,856 22,817 10,495 60,452 11,770 335 1,198
Realised forex
gain/(loss) -35,739 -23,617 114,930 2,019 -30,005 -12,012 2,491
Unrealised
forex
gain/(loss)
2,779 51,182 -102,488 -13,637 51,733 1,055 -4,158
Withdrawn
from EU claim -49,743 -18,063 -35,841 -8,036 1,171 2,858 -21,933
Net
expenditure
reimbursable
by the EU
4,259,652 4,713,649 4,169,040 4,384,237 4,267,436 3,755,451 3,459,497
Note:
* 2016-17 balances include the latest available information. Some Managing Authority returns may be based on unaudited
financial statements.
59
Table D.2: Statement of Assets and Liabilities as at 31 March 2011 to 31 March 2017 (prior years restated)
£ thousand
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17*
Assets
Advances to
beneficiaries 219,642 25,594 17,340 26,143 24,788 26,640 42,262
EU funds
receivable 1,931,886 1,763,336 1,763,235 2,314,084 1,622,625 2,146,918 1,219,556
Other assets 1,798 254,299 207,990 258,436 281,893 484,815 405,412
2,153,326 2,043,229 1,988,565 2,598,663 1,929,306 2,658,373 1,667,230
Liabilities
EU funds
paid on
account
-1,938,419 -1,860,340 -997,802 -655,634 -530,013 -574,869 -379,520
Amounts
payable to
beneficiaries
-140,863 -183,401 -186,053 -148,459 -73,928 -328,505 -395,885
Repayable to
EU -3,525 -2,697 -238,694 -543,684 -737,127 -685,287 -645,931
Provision for
disallowance -177,886 -212,390 -214,681 -100,154 -5,585 -34,180 -245,558
Other
liabilities -24,607 -66,734 285 517 517 -2,885 -151
-2,285,300 -2,325,562 -1,636,945 -1,447,414 -1,346,136 -1,625,726 -1,667,045
Net Assets /
(Liabilities) -131,974 -282,333 351,620 1,151,249 583,170 1,032,647 185
Note: * 2016-17 balances include the latest available information. Some Managing Authority returns may be based on unaudited financial
statements.
60
Accounting policies
Basis of preparation
D.28 This report has been prepared by collating the relevant transactions and
balances as recorded by the Managing Authorities in their financial
statements. Their financial statements have been prepared in accordance
with the FReM. This report is prepared under the historical cost convention
which is an accounting method that, for the purposes of the Statement of
Financial Position (Balance Sheet), values assets at the price paid for them at
the time they were acquired.
Expenditure recognition
D.29 Gross expenditure on EU supported projects is recognised in the period in
which it becomes payable by UK central government to the recipient under
the rules of the relevant scheme. The amount shown in these accounts
represents the amount paid and payable in Sterling during the period by
Managing Authorities. Net EU expenditure represents the amount receivable
from the EU (converted into sterling after disallowance and foreign exchange
gains or losses) in respect of amounts paid or payable by the UK on EU
supported projects.
Foreign currency translation
D.30 The European Commission makes payments in Euros, with the Managing
Authority recognising the receivable in Sterling in line with the requirements
of International Accounting Standard (IAS) 21 The Effects of Changes in
Foreign Exchange Rates.
The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates
D.31 Foreign exchange gains and losses are realised where there are variations in
exchange rates between payments incurred and reimbursements. For
example, for ERDF, ESF and EMFF, there is often an exchange rate difference
due to the lag between the date when EU funding is paid out by the
Managing Authority and the date when this payment is subsequently
checked and registered by the Certifying Authority, on which basis the EU
reimburses the expenditure incurred. Such gains and losses are recognised in
the Expenditure Statement (Table D.1). Unrealised gains and losses arising
from the revaluation of assets and liabilities at the exchange rate current at
the Statement of Financial Position date, also reported in the Expenditure
Statement, are reported in the accounts of Managing Authorities within the
Statement of Changes in Taxpayers’ Equity. Any hedging mechanisms used
to mitigate the impact of foreign exchange losses are not included in this
report as they do not impact on the amounts paid out on EU projects or the
funding provided by the EU.
61
Disallowance provision and contingent liabilities
D.32 Probable disallowance arising from financial corrections are recognised in
accordance with the requirements of IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities
and Contingent Assets. A provision is recognised where there is a past event
– for example an ineligible payment or a failure to comply with the
regulations governing a scheme – which will probably lead to the EU
disallowing expenditure and not reimbursing the UK. Managing Authorities
are responsible for estimating the value of any provisions required.
Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme
Table D.3: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2010-2011 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy
Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 3,312,286 561,330 484,584 39,305 4,397,505
Total disallowance provided
for -67,419 0 -7,122 -465 -75,006
Total disallowance released 11,585 0 5,973 2,298 19,856
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) (restated) -17,877 -7,193 -6,906 -984 -32,960
Total withdrawn from EU
claim (restated) -1,171 -1,999 -46,573 0 -49,743
Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 3,237,404 552,138 429,956 40,154 4,259,652
62
Table D.4: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2011-2012 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy
Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 3,695,178 470,955 574,501 33,343 4,773,977
Total disallowance provided
for -90,049 -1,696 0 -902 -92,647
Total disallowance released 1,300 0 21,398 119 22,817
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) (restated) 3,798 4,727 19,215 -175 27,565
Total withdrawn from EU
claim (restated) 0 20 -18,083 0 -18,063
Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 3,610,227 474,006 597,031 32,385 4,713,649
Table D.5: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2012-13 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy
Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 3,234,417 321,054 604,264 57,059 4,216,794
Total disallowance provided
for (restated) -34,616 0 0 -234 -34,850
Total disallowance released
(restated) 10,427 0 0 68 10,495
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) (restated) 11,333 105,101 -1,338 -166 114,930
Total withdrawn from EU
claim (restated) -666 -100,252 -2,075 505 -102,488
Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 3,220,895 325,903 600,851 57,232 4,204,881
63
Table D.6: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2013-14 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy
Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 3,356,609 347,699 589,193 51,770 4,345,271
Total disallowance provided
for (restated) -1,190 0 0 -642 -1,832
Total disallowance released
(restated) 59,686 0 0 766 60,452
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) (restated) 3,931 -2,059 -15,061 1,571 -11,618
Total withdrawn from EU
claim (restated) 0 0 -7,012 -1,024 -8,036
Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 3,419,036 345,640 567,120 52,441 4,384,237
64
Table D.7: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2014-15 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 2,047,918 1,062,112 304,154 100,116 461,803 232,840 32,491 12,792 2,846,366 1,407,860
Total disallowance provided
for (restated) -18,123 -3,336 0 0 0 0 0 0 -18,123 -3,336
Total disallowance released
(restated) 9,498 1,154 0 0 0 0 1,118 0 10,616 1,154
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) (restated) -408 -240 21,326 2,992 -8,939 6,547 372 78 12,351 9,377
Total withdrawn from EU
claim (restated) 0 0 0 -27 6,057 -4,746 -113 0 5,944 -4,773
Net expenditure reimbursable
by EU 2,038,885 1,059,690 325,480 103,081 458,921 234,641 33,868 12,870 2,857,154 1,410,282
Total Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 3,098,575 428,561 693,562 46,738 4,267,436
65
Table D.8: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2015-16
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 1,694,956 930,427 516,839 102,543 299,781 169,221 71,882 10,134 2,583,458 1,212,325
Total disallowance provided
for -17,224 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 0 0 0 -17,224 -15,344
Total disallowance released 0 0 0 0 0 0 335 0 335 0
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) 1,939 1,851 -4,879 -5,422 1,909 -8,478 2,123 0 1,092 -12,049
Total withdrawn from EU
claim 0 0 0 -1,562 6,854 -1,616 -818 0 6,036 -3,178
Net expenditure reimbursable
by EU 1,679,671 931,266 511,960 81,227 308,544 159,127 73,522 10,134 2,573,697 1,181,754
Total Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 2,610,937 593,187 467,671 83,656 3,755,451
66
Table D.9: Analysis of Net Expenditure by EU Scheme 2016-17*
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs
Gross expenditure in the
United Kingdom 2,212,301 1,022,627 25,185 59,932 310,706 51,006 17,732 12,102 2,565,924 1,145,667
Total disallowance provided
for -229,572 -120 0 0 0 0 0 0 -229,572 -120
Total disallowance released 0 0 0 0 0 1,198 0 0 0 1,198
Total foreign exchange
gains/(losses) -4,419 -1,577 0 -1,236 6,551 -3,010 243 1,781 2,375 -4,042
Total withdrawn from EU
claim 0 0 0 -11,130 -3,485 -7,318 0 0 -3,485 -18,448
Net expenditure reimbursable
by EU 1,978,310 1,020,930 25,185 47,566 313,772 41,876 17,975 13,883 2,335,242 1,124,255
Total Net expenditure
reimbursable by EU 2,999,240 72,751 355,648 31,858 3,459,497
Note: *2016-17 balances include the latest available information. Some Managing Authority returns may be based on unaudited financial statements.
67
Provisions for future financial corrections (disallowance) D.33 As previously stated in Chapter 5, disallowance or financial corrections are imposed by the
European Commission on member states for failing to correctly apply EU Regulations in
managing and administering EU schemes. In such circumstances the EU reduces the amount
paid to the UK.
D.34 The European Commission may identify erroneous payments or deficiencies in the
administration of schemes, and consequently can disallow expenditure. In the case of
perceived systematic deficiencies, the European Commission can impose flat-rate disallowance
at the rate of 2%, 3%, 5%, 7% or 10% (or higher in some circumstances) of annual
expenditure, depending on the severity of the failings. The EU will not reimburse the UK for
the expenditure incurred. The costs then fall on the Exchequer, unless the amount can be
recovered from the beneficiary. The ultimate financial impact on the UK taxpayer will,
however, be less than this, due to the operation of the rebate system. For more details on the
rebate system please see the Glossary of this document.
D.35 As set out in Chapter 5, table D.9 shows that a significant portion of provisions in 2016-17
continues to be related to agricultural policy funding and the portion has indeed increased as
at the Statement of Financial Position (Balance Sheet) date of the 31 March 2017 – largely due
to the size of the fund and the complexity of the regulations. Disallowance was expected to be
high for CAP years 2015 and 2016 due to the implementation of new CAP arrangements,
which were complex and subject to an unknown Commission approach. The new provisions
entered in 2016-17 are in respect of Basic Payment Scheme audits primarily relating to
entitlements (required by farmers claiming direct payments), as well as in relation to area aids
and cross compliance (rules for farmers and land managers claiming direct payments). The
provisions were previously published in Chapter 3 of DEFRA’s Annual Report and Accounts for
2016/17. Following engagement with the Commission, DEFRA believe that the final
disallowance associated with the audit of 2015-16 Basic Payment Scheme entitlements will be
less than the original forecast which informed the provisions made. The current CAP
disallowance strategy reflects the latest intelligence from these processes and will continue to
be updated. In 2016-17, there were also some – relatively small – disallowance provisions
relating to the European Social Fund.
68
Table D.10: Provisions for future financial corrections 2010-11 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
As at 1 April 2010 -259,150 -33,795 -62,904 -3,518 -359,367
Created during the year -67,419 0 -7,122 -465 -75,006
Released in year 11,585 0 5,973 2,298 19,856
Utilised 180,009 33,795 22,555 272 236,631
As at 31 March 2011 -134,975 0 -41,498 -1,413 -177,886
Table D.11: Provisions for future financial corrections 2011-12 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
As at 1 April 2011 -134,975 0 -41,498 -1,413 -177,886
Created during the year -90,049 -1,696 0 -902 -92,647
Released in year 1,300 0 21,398 119 22,817
Utilised 29,170 1,696 4,336 124 35,326
As at 31 March 2012 -194,554 0 -15,764 -2,072 -212,390
69
Table D.12: Provisions for future financial corrections 2012-13 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
As at 1 April 2012 -194,554 0 -15,764 -2,072 -212,390
Created during the year -34,616 0 0 -234 -34,850
Released in year 10,427 0 0 68 10,495
Utilised 21,924 0 140 0 22,064
As at 31 March 2013 -196,819 0 -15,624 -2,238 -214,681
Table D.13: Provisions for future financial corrections 2013-14 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural
Policy Funding
European
Social Fund
European
Regional
Development
Fund
Other Total
As at 1 April 2013 -196,819 0 -15,623 -2,238 -214,680
Created during the year -1,190 0 0 -642 -1,832
Released in year 59,686 0 0 766 60,452
Utilised 78,707 0 13,304 234 92,245
As at 31 March 2014 -59,616 0 -2,319 -1,880 -63,815
70
Table D.14: Provisions for future financial corrections 2014-15 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs
As at 1 April 2014 -83,829 -12,050 0 0 0 -2,319 -1,880 0 -85,709 -14,369
Created during the year -18,123 -3,336 0 0 0 0 0 0 -18,123 -3,336
Released in year 9,498 1,154 0 0 0 0 1,118 0 10,616 1,154
Utilised 27,941 7,536 0 0 0 856 0 0 27,941 8,392
As at 31 March 2015 -64,513 -6,696 0 0 0 -1,463 -762 0 -65,275 -8,159
Total as at 31 March 2015 -71,209 0 -1,463 -762 -73,434
Table D.15: Provisions for future financial corrections 2015-16 (restated)
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs
As at 1 April 2015 -64,513 0 0 0 0 -1,198 -632 0 -65,145 -1,198
Created during the year -17,224 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 0 0 0 -17,224 -15,344
Released in year 0 0 0 0 0 0 335 0 335 0
Utilised 64,099 0 0 0 0 0 297 0 64,396 0
As at 31 March 2016 -17,638 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 -1,198 0 0 -17,638 -16,542
Total as at 31 March 2016 -18,650 -14,332 -1,198 0 -34,180
71
Table D.16: Provisions for future financial corrections 2016-17*
£ thousand
Agricultural Funding European Social Fund European Regional
Development Fund
Other Total
England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs England DAs
As at 1 April 2016 -17,638 -1,012 0 -14,332 0 -1,198 0 0 -17,638 -16,542
Created during the year -229,572 -120 0 0 0 0 0 0 -229,572 -120
Released in year 0 0 0 0 0 1,198 0 0 0 1,198
Utilised 2,772 1,012 0 13,332 0 0 0 0 2,772 14,344
As at 31 March 2017 -244,438 -120 0 -1,000 0 0 0 0 -244,438 -1,120
Total as at 31 March 2017 -244,558 -1,000 0 0 -245,558
Note:
*2016-17 balances include the latest available information. Some Managing Authority returns may be based on unaudited financial statements.
72
Research programme grant receipts D.36 The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (currently Horizon
2020) is the EU’s primary mechanism for supporting transnational
collaborative research and technological development. The current
programme runs from 2014 to 2020 and, following the establishment of the
European Fund for Strategic Investments, has an overall budget of €74.8
billion (£66.4 billion2) (excluding the Euratom programme).
D.37 The UK government does not manage any of the Horizon 2020 funding,
which is awarded directly to programme participants.
D.38 Horizon 2020 activities are split into three main areas: Excellent science,
Industrial leadership and Societal challenges.
D.39 The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy released the
latest statistics on UK participation in Horizon 2020 in December 20171
which shows that, as of September 2017, UK organisations have been
awarded a total of €3.9 billion (£3.5 billion2), which accounts for 15.1% of
the EU funding so far awarded under Horizon 2020 (excluding Euratom).
These receipts are not included in the above tables, which provide data on
public sector receipts only.
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uks-participation-in-horizon-2020-september-2017
2 2018: £1 = €1.11271. This is the 29 December 2017 exchange rate, which is the rate at which all UK VAT-based and GNI-based
contributions, and the UK rebate, are being converted to sterling throughout 2018.
HM Treasury contacts
This document can be downloaded from www.gov.uk
If you require this information in an alternative format or have general enquiries about HM Treasury and its work, contact:
Correspondence Team HM Treasury 1 Horse Guards Road London SW1A 2HQ
Tel: 020 7270 5000
Email: [email protected]
![INDEX [biblioteca.informadb.pt]payments within agreed terms (+11.3 percentage points compared with the national average). Next, are small companies, where the percentage reaches 39.5%](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/5e76f6c0b573ec1b353f9a05/index-payments-within-agreed-terms-113-percentage-points-compared-with-the.jpg)
